Interesting reading! Part 1

[Nawbee]

Licensing and Ordaining of Women Ministers
On February 6, 2001 the governing Board of Elders of the United Apostolic Church
International, voted by a majority vote NOT to license or ordain women for the
ministry. Any current licenses issued to women will not be renewed. This is in
accordance with Ephesians 4:8-12, 1 Timothy 2:12, I Corinthians 14:34,35 as well
as the natural order as set by our Lord and Savior Himself.
We understand that in these end times more and more Christian organizations are
licensing women, including Apostolic Pentecostal organizations. We also understand
that due to the current political tide that a woman should be able to do anything a
man can do. That's man's thinking and not God's order.
Jesus chose 12 disciples that would be His apostles and lead the Church. All were
men, no women. When the apostles replaced Judas, they voted between two men,
no women. No woman is found preaching the gospel in the entire New Testament.
This includes Priscilla who was being a help meet and a witness for her husband. No
woman is found to have written a single epistle. Women should not rebel in this but
simply know and be content in their place as the weaker gender. God did not set the
same tasks before women that he set before men. Nor did He give them the same
gifts (Ephesians 4:8), He designed them differently.
This is not to say that women are any less than a man or a man is better. “For by
one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles,
whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.” – I
Corinthians 12:13.
Please note that we are not saying a woman cannot be a disciple which literally
means pupil. Nor are we saying that a women cannot have all of the gifts of the
Spirit including that of prophesy. Nor are we saying that a woman cannot possess
gifts of the ministry such as pastor, teacher, etc.
One of the primary reasons that we do not license or ordain women is not because
they cannot be given gifts of the ministry by God, but rather because of the modern
day church’s misconception of what a pastor is. Since the general incorrect concept
of what a pastor is in the church is one who is in charge or in authority, we therefore
cannot give license.
We therefore commend any women given gifts in the ministry to the eldership of the
local assembly and under their direction and leadership she may utilize her gifts in
the local assembly as long as they are in accordance with I Timothy 2:12” “But I
suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in
silence.”
Women have a wonderful place in the church. They can have and use Spiritual gifts
to edify the church. They are a help meet to their husbands, they are intercessors,
they are the caring, nurturing element every church needs. They can teach and
pastor the younger women, children and new convert women as well. There is so
much for women to do it the church without trying to take the place of leadership
God intended for men, that is simply out of God’s order.
To learn more about a pastor is or about Biblical Church Government please read
God's Plan for Oversight of the Glorious Church

[In His Service]

Amen here too!
Bro. Timothy

[Faithchild]

Where is ThirdGen when we need her?

[Xerf]

I think it was Billy Sunday who said, "A woman preaching is like a dog walking on its hind legs..........he can do (though not well), but it never looks natural."


(Good thing poor Billy is dead and gone.......cause he would get run over here in a little while)!


:)

[nightwatchman]

TEN WOMEN IN MINISTRY. PART 1

In Romans 16, we have people from at least three races - Latins, Jews, and Greeks, who are 'all one in Christ Jesus.' They are from lower and upper classes, including slaves and freed slaves - these, with people from the privileged groups are now all 'one in Christ Jesus.' Of the 29 people, ten are women. Apart from Priscilla, none is mentioned elsewhere in the NT. And Paul - who some think belittled the status of women in the church - honoured these women and held them in high regard. 'In spite of the lack of information on these women, it is reasonably certain that they must have had some importance in the Church to be included in this list of greetings.' (5) Paul also held the church in high regard: in these verses (1-16) Paul mentions the church at Cenchrea (1), all the churches of the Gentiles (4), the church in their house (5), the churches of Christ (16). Paul had a great concern for the welfare of individuals, and for the churches. The church of Jesus Christ is glorious, not because it's perfect, but because it is being redeemed!

The phrase 'In Christ' is mentioned ten times in the first 16 verses. Whether Paul talks about Christians suffering or serving, the supreme thought in Paul is that these believers in Rome were all 'in Christ' or 'in the Lord' (vv. 2,3,7,8, 9,10,11,13; cf. 8:1; Philippians 3:14; 4:13).

In the ancient world (as today) when someone is applying for a position or job they seek testimonials or references from others who know them well. In the Brethren Assemblies I grew up in we had 'letters of commendation' from one assembly to another if someone was traveling or moving residence. These sustatikai epistolai, letters of introduction, were common in business transactions in the ancient world as well.

So Paul is here commending Phoebe (16:1) to the church in Rome. She is the bearer of this letter. He asks them to welcome her.

Two terms describe her - diakonos - deacon, servant, minister, and prostatis - a great help to many people. Is diakonos a reference to a special 'order' of ministers? We don't know. The term is used generically in 1 Thess. 3:2, 2 Cor. 3:6, 11:23; of a specific group or function in Phil 1:1, 1 Timothy 3:8,12. And it is used of Christ (Romans 15:8), Apollos (1 Corinthians 3:5), Timothy (1 Timothy 4:6) and of Paul himself (1 Corinthians 3:5, Ephesians 3:7; Colossians 1:23,25). An evangelical NT scholar, E Earl Ellis, in an article 'Paul and his Co-Workers' (1971) concluded that diakonoa in Paul referred to a special class of co-workers who were active in preaching and teaching. (6)

She is also a prostatis - the only time in the NT this word as a noun appears. In secular Greek at that time this was a relatively strong term of leadership. The verb is used by Paul in three out of five occurrences to refer to leadership in the Church. Thus the word probably suggests Phoebe had a prominent role: one translator uses the word 'overseer'. And I still meet churches which won't have a woman on their diaconate!

Prisca and Aquila (16:3) were a fascinating couple. Prisca is sometimes called Priscilla (Acts 18:2,18,26) - an affectionate version of the same name.

When they first appear on the pages of the NT (Acts 18:1-2) they're in Rome. Claudius banished Jews from Rome in AD 52 and this couple settled in Corinth. They were tent-makers - the same trade as Paul's - so in Corinth he stayed with them. They and Paul left Corinth together and went to Ephesus where Prisca and Aquila settled (Acts 18:18). A brilliant Alexandrian scholar Apollos visited Ephesus, and stayed with Prisca and Aquila. Apollos did not have a full understanding of the Christian faith, so in addition to hospitality this special couple taught him as well (Acts 18:24-26). Later, when Paul wrote his first letter to the Corinthians from Ephesus, he sent greetings from Prisca and Aquila and from the church in their house (1 Corinthians 16:19). Next we hear of them back in Rome: the edict banishing Jews must have lost its steam, and many people like Prisca and Aquila no doubt drifted back to that city to their old homes and jobs. Once again we discover they have a church in their home. The last time they appear is in 2 Timothy 4:19, and they're back in Ephesus. One of the last messages Paul sent to anyone was to this couple, who had come through so much with him.

So wherever these nomadic people are - Rome, Corinth, Ephesus, back in Rome, or finally again in Ephesus - their home is a centre for Christian ministry, worship and hospitality (1 Cor. 16:19, Philemon 2).

But there's something odd about the way they're mentioned in despatches in the NT: they are always mentioned together, and on four of the six occasions Prisca is named before her husband. Normally - then as now - the husband's name is mentioned first - 'Mr. and Mrs.'. One theory suggested by (Presbyterian) William Barclay is that she was a member of a noble Roman family: 'It may be that at some meeting of Christians this great Roman lady met Aquila the humble Jewish tentmaker, that the two fell in love, that Christianity destroyed the barriers of race and rank and wealth and birth, and that these two, the Roman aristocrat and the Jewish artisan, were joined forever in Christian love and Christian service.' (7) Maybe. But perhaps it's more likely her leadership gifts or her role in the church was the reason she's mentioned first.

Paul calls them fellow-workers: the same term is used of men such as Timothy and Titus, as well as of women such as Euodia and Syntyche. 'He also considers Apollos and himself God's "fellow- workers" (1 Corinthians 3:9). It is in this group of people who take leadership in the ministry of the gospel that Priscilla, without any distinction related to her sex, is included as well as her husband Aquila.' (8) We don't know what roles all these people had as 'fellow-workers' - perhaps their roles were as diverse as their gifts.

Mary (16:6). There are at least six Marys in the NT story - and they are all special people. We don't know anything more about this Mary than that 'she has worked very hard' among them, a similar expression to that used of Tryphena and Tryphosa and Persdis (16:12). What kind of hard work? Did she grow flowers for Sunday services? Clean out the room before house-church? Serve eats after the worship? Perhaps - these so-called menial tasks are honoured when the Lord Christ is served. But the Greek verb 'work very hard' is used regularly by Paul to refer to the special work of the gospel ministry. Only twice does Paul use it in a common or secular sense - both within a proverbial expression (Ephesians 4:8, 2 Timothy 2:6). Paul frequently describes his apostolic ministry with this word, and also the ministry of other leaders and persons of authority: the context of some of these stresses the need for respect for and submission to such workers. [Cf. Euodia and Syntyche (Philippians 4:2,3) two women Paul describes as having '...contended at my side in the cause of the gospel' (NIV)].

Andronicus and Junia (16:7) were Christians before Paul was - their conversion goes right back to the time of Stephen, so they must have had a direct link back to the earliest church in Jerusalem.

[nightwatchman]

PART 2
There is some debate about the sex of Junia or Junias. Paul's word junian may be either masculine or feminine. So we have to be a bit tentative here. Andronicus was certainly a common male name, but there's no evidence Junias was used as a male name. John Chrysostom (d. AD 407), one of the first Greek fathers to write extensive commentaries on Paul, and known for his 'negative' view of women, understood that Junia was a woman. He marveled that this woman should be called an apostle! In fact... the first commentator to understand Junia as a male name (Aegidius of Rome) lived in the 13th century. (9)

He/she is outstanding among (en) the apostles: does this mean Junia was well known by the apostles or well known as an apostle? '[The] natural meaning in Greek is that these two were outstanding as apostles.' (10) The term 'apostle' was used in the early church not just for the Twelve but for any authorised Christian missionaries.

Were Tryphaena and Tryphosa (16:12) twin sisters? Their names mean 'dainty and delicate' but they worked (kopian) to the point of exhaustion! Barclay suggests Paul may have had a smile on his face when he wrote that!

The mother of Rufus (16:13) was one of two women mentioned specifically but not named. She brought to Paul the help and comfort and love which his own family refused him when he became a Christian. Julia and the sister of Nereus (16:15) were both greeted without comment.

Note that all these people were commended for their work: we are called to serve, not just to be church consumers! Note also the way Paul encourages people: when did we last do that?

Finally three scholarly comments. # 'Romans 16:1-16, then, in an incidental way, allows us to see that Paul had several women co- workers in the church's ministry. Mary, Tryphena, Tryphosa and Persis (as well as Euodia and Syntyche mentioned in Philippians 4:2-3) all shared in the hard labours of a gospel ministry. Priscilla also was a fellow worker with Paul in the ministry. Phoebe was a minister of the Cenchrean church and a leader in the Church. Junia was, along with Andronicus (her husband?) an outstanding apostle. When the issues of Paul's view of women in the church are addressed in reference to such texts as 1 Corinthians 14: 34-35 and 1 Timothy 2:8-15, these women co-workers in the ministry must not only not be forgotten; they must be accounted for in the overall assessment of Paul's view.' (11)

# 'That Paul should not only include a woman among the apostles but actually describe her, together with Andronicus, as outstanding among them, is highly significant evidence (along with the importance he accords in this chapter to Phoebe, Prisca, Mary, Tryphena, Tryphosa, Persis, the mother of Rufus, Julia and the sister of Nereus) of the falsity of the widespread and stubbornly persistent notion that Paul had a low view of women and something to which the Church as a whole has so far failed to pay proper attention.' (12)

# 'Just as the church has moved beyond the NT toleration of slavery to a recognition that Christian principles forbid slavery, so too we can with a good conscience accept a larger place for women in the ministry of the church than was possible in first- century society.' (13)

When I visited the largest church in the world in Seoul, Korea, in 1978, I was not surprised to learn that 80% of their small group leaders were women. I attended one of these, led very capably by a woman. The church is immeasur- ably impoverished when more than half its members are debarred from exercising leadership ministries not on the basis of the presence or absence of giftedness or competence, but simply because of gender. I thank God for the many women who have toiled so graciously for the Lord despite this discrimination. The time has now come to practise the principle that in Christ social, racial and sexual barriers have been removed.

Rowland Croucher

[ThirdGeneration]

Faithchild, where have you been?

Why did the apostles choose between two men and no women when replacing Judas?

I would suggest that although Jesus changed everything; everything was not going to change overnight. The new Christians initially brought much of their Jewish understanding into their decision making process.

It is interesting to note that making a cholce by lot was never seen again after the Holy Ghost fell.

In the earliest times of the church, they were still unaware that the Gentiles were going to be a part of the church. The account of Cornelius did not take place until the tenth chapter; the Samaritans and the Eunich in the eighth.

Many people may not realize that under the OT, the Eunich was forbiden in God's house (Deut 23:1).

So in the 1st chapter of Acts, the actions of the apostles were still very much in keeping with their Jewish roots. To look for a woman to minister was just about as unthinkable as Gentiles, Eunichs and Samaritans becoming Abraham's seed.

Consequently, when Paul speaks of Phoebe a "servant" of Cenchrea Church (Romans 16:1); we must acknowledge that the radical transformation taking place in the NT church included women working in the church as able ministers.

Please note that the Greek word translated into the Word "servant" in this verse was in most cases translated as minister or deacon elsewhere.

As to the Apostle issue- Why didn't God see fit to have a Gentile apostle? Should we attach relevance to that?

Or do we recognize that the 12 Apostles were representative of the 12 patriarchs of old (the sons of Jacob)? Do we realize that to have selected a Gentile at the beginning of Jesus' ministry would have created great doubt in the minds of those he came to minister to (Matthew 15:24)?

What did the OT have to say about the status of women in the NT? What was foreshadowed?

Beginning in the Garden of Eden, we find that even as God told the women how bad life was going to be for her outside the garden; he assured her that delvery was coming.

And I will put enmity between thee and the woman; and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head and thou shall bruise his heel (Gen 3:15).

Thus Christ was foreshadowed to redeem whosoever will. And with redemption, comes a clean slate. Is that not true?

In fact, even before redemption God said He was going to look at the individuals and not punish individuals for the sins of their fathers. See the 18th chapter of Ezekiel.

Thus one would have to wonder what has the sin of Eve got to do with a blood bought, Spirit filled woman? I say absolutely nothing.

For we are all NEW CREATURES in Christ (2 Cor 5:17).

Was this radical shift from women as second class citizens foreshadowed in the OT? Absolutely.

God initially selected only males of the Levite tribe to be priests. But he told Israel that he wanted to make them a kingdom of priests (Ex 19:6).

Peter told the NT church (including women) that indeed we were now a royal priesthood (1 Peter 1:9).

Only men were circumcised in the OT. But in the NT, the circumcision of the heart was for all (Col 3:11-14).

Joel prophesied that God was going to pour out His Spirit upon all; whereas in the past God's annoiting was upon a few chosen leaders.

But realize that ALL of these radical transformations took place after the church was born, not when Jesus was ministering on earth.

And so the NT church was born in the midst of Jewish culture by putting on Christ. In doing so they lost their identity as male or female, Jew or Greek, bond or free (Gal 3:28). This meant that the Jewish constraints placed upon women for thousands of years were broken and women had an equal right to partake at the table and SERVE.

Last but not least;; an overlooked portion of Job, also foreshadowed women's eqaulity in Christ.

Remember Job initially had 7 sons and 3 daughters? Looking at the numbers, some would find that seven was the number that completed the beginning of the OT when God created the earth and three was the number that ushered in the NT upon the death, burial and ressurection of Christ.

With that in mind consider that in the first chapter of Job, we find that when his kids got together, the sisters visited their brother's houses. Presumably because they did not have one of their own.

But in the last chapter of Job, when God is blessing him with a double portion.... we find a most exraordinary thing occuring with Job's new set of children.

And in the land there were no daughters as fair as the daughters of Job: AND THEIR FATHER GAVE THEM AN INHERITANCE AMONG THEIR BROTHERS (Job 42:15).

Let that sink in. It was unheard of and specifically and pointedly recorded in Scripture. Indeed, the NT church was a radical change form the face of Judiasm. But isn't that what Christianity is all about? We are indeed, new creatures in Christ.

[ddc101]

How many on this thread have ever considered going to bible college?

[ThirdGeneration]

How could we conclude that God would favor one group over another in ministry if we are all equal before the cross of Calvary? Would we find God to be no respector of person if only non-Gentiles could lead?

Some have stated that the ministry and the gifts are not the same. I can find no Scriptural basis for a belief that "pulpit ministry" is something different from the gifts of the Spirit .

After carefully considering what Paul wrote, I find that the gifts of the Spirit are an individual's ministry.

Consider that we are all a royal priesthood (1 Peter 2:9); and given the ministry of reconciliation (2 Cor 5:18). Thus, I believe we minister to others by the Spiritual gifting we are given.

Indeed, Paul recognized that his ministry was a gift from God. He stated, "I was made a MINISTER, according to the GIFT OF THE GRACE of God given unto me by the effectual working of HIS power (Eph 3:7).

We already know that "The manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man [gender neutral] to profit withal" (1 Cor 12:7). We also know that the gift of leadership is encompassed in these gifts.

6 Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether PROPHECY, let us wait on prophecy according to the proportion of faith;

7 Or MINISTRY, let us wait on our ministering: or he that teacheth, on TEACHING;

8 Or he that EXHORTETH on exhortation; he that giveth, let him do it with simplicity; he that RULETH, with diligence; he that showeth mercy with cheerfulness (Romans 12:6-8).

Paul broght up "the ministry" in his list of gifts of the Spirit in the 12th chapter of 1 Corinthians. (See 1 Cor 12:28-31) There is nothing to indicate that he saw a difference between ministry and gifts of the Spirit. (See 1 Cor 12; Romans 12; and Eph 4).

Incidently, these chapters that speak of ministry in the body of Chirst need to be read with Greek dictionary in hand. Thus one learns that man or men are neutral as to gender rather than specific as they could have been if Paul so intended.

Finally, let's not forget that His Spirit baptizes us into the body. There does not appear to be separate drinking fountains. For by one Spirit have we all been baptized into one body....and have all been made to DRINK INTO ONE SPIRIT (1 Cor 12:13).

Gender is not an issue in the body of Christ since we are all NEW CREATURES in Christ (2 Cor 5:16) that have put on the NEW MAN which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness (Eph 4:24).

[Xerf]

Like I said, Good thing old Billy is dead and gone or he would be on the spit tonight!

:)


Whose the trouble maker that started all this? After 3200 posts on the old GNC I am convinced that ....................... it will come up again, why I can almost recite the buts and the rebuts............and I hardly know anything (according to some select persons), maybe I ought to go to Bible college........... then I could but and rebut with my own buttals!!!!!

[In His Service]

Mr. Croucher is not a Apostolic Oneness beleiver is he?

It is always humorous to me that people will look towards someone that can not see the basics to try and understand the deeper things. I will try to work on Mr. Crouchers statements tomorrow. Though it is hard having a discussion with the author when he is copy and pasted, :~) How can the one posting anothers arguement answer like the author?

Bro. Timothy

[bishop1]

Nightwatchman:
I read and re-read your post.

Please give me New Testament chapter and verse
'where a woman was made Pastor, Preacher, Overseer,
Elder, or an Apostle.

Thank You

[ddc101]

Xerf,
Here is the link....www.vfweb.org/icofcollege/
Its free to members and $25 bucks a month to non members.

[ThirdGeneration]

Bishop- Why stop there? How about producing a Gentile apostle? Or a minister that drove a car, shaved and spoke English?

[ddc101]

I want to know where in the bible the ministry wore $500 suits and expensive shoes and ties and drove lincolns to go preach from here to their.I think their mode of transpost was sandals????sis.c

[pastorb]

Nawbee,

AS I consider Ephesians 4 I don't see gender so I need some help with thay scripture.

444 // anyrwpov // anthropos // anth'-ro-pos //

from 435 and ops (the countenance, from 3700 ); man-faced, i.e. a
human being; TDNT - 1:364,59; n m

AV - man 552, not tr 4, misc 3; 559

1) a human being, whether male or female
1a) generically, to include all human individuals
1b) to distinguish man from beings of a different order

1 Timothy 2:12 Paul says I don't give woman license or liberty to...

This is his choice show me where it is God's? I use this for a reference and this is what got the chatholic priest all messed up. Paul also said, I'd rather you all be like me, but if you can't. It's better to marry than to burn. No hard and fast rule to celibacy is implied today by us. Just a thought.

And as far as Usurping authoruty over a man

To Usurp: seize something without right: use something without the right to do so

Aren't we talking about the gospel that was given to all men (genderless)?

What is preaching? to stand and proclaim truth/absolute truth of Jesus.

Who can Preach truth? Everybody!!!!!

In 1st Corinthians 14:34,35 if they want to be hypocrites and hold to that then we are all guilty.

If my wife being a woman (thank you Jesus) must keep silent, then women can't sing like angels accept over the pots while making the evening meal, they can't testify that others may over come and be encouraged, They can't teach the babies, the sisters or anyone else because this would be out of order.

And if this really be the case, every woman needs to allow her tongue to cleve to the roof of her mouth and have her husband post for her from now on since he is the one with dominion over her concerning the word of God.

We understand that in these end times more and more Christian organizations are licensing women, including Apostolic Pentecostal organizations.

What is it that made them think they had a right to license them to begin with, what scripture references did they use to start with and why did they change or did God change?

Why was God mentioning Priscilla here in Acts or was God just being polite to Aquilla showing respect to his wife, or did she bring something to the table of ministry as well.

I don't know and unless you can show me in scripture and not use conjecture or assumptions where there are no facts, I would submit that you don't either.

So let me sumize, she (a woman) can learn, she can be a disciple, she just can't testify about it or she'll be out of order, she can grow in the word of God she just can't go ye therefore, or else, she's out of order, and if she gets real happy and bold like Peter did on the day of Pentecost; she, would be out of order.

Please allow our sisters to take the same stance we aught to be taking.

"I'm just a nobody trying to tell everybody, about somebody, who can save anybody."

Just a thought!!!


Again, Just a thought, work with me.

[ThirdGeneration]

Pastorb- Great post!

[searching]

What about the passage where Paul asks, "Are all Apostles? Do all speak in tongues? Are all Prophets?" (paraphrased) Was he referring to men only?

Me...

[pastorb]

Well Ddc101, I went to bible college and I started out with a $99.00 dollar suit but when suit city went out of business I had to step up, So I hit the garment district and the more I learned the more my suits cost and the closer I got to graduation and licensing I moved into a bigger house and when I started preaching real good (for more than 5 min ) I bought a brief case to hold my pen, pad and bible. After preaching more than 10 times a year I bought my wife a new car. Now that I'm pastoring I don't have a lincoln but I sure got a Ford.

Love that Expedition.

[ddc101]

Hi Pastorb,
It is so funny how some people make a worldly career out of preaching.Not including you of course.But it sickens me to think how much money each year is spent on expensive things that could build more truth teaching churches or help missionaries to stay on the field.We live in the day when people spend more on dinner after church than they put in the offering....ouch.....sis.c

[pastorb]

Ddc101

You are absolutely right, they give me a bad name. haha

I've got five children you you know jow much I spend at hometown buffet.

I got to work a half a day to make that money back or find me a meeting somewhere.

Just kidding!!!!!!! :-)

[Faithchild]

Ddc, being a full-time minister I'd like to respond to that last shot.
I drive a 2000 Cadillac Catera. I bought it with 35,600 miles on it and paid less for it than if I would have bought ANY new SUV, pickup or basic family car on the market. It is a heavy car, comfortable, and will stand up to the 1,000+ miles I drive weekly.
I can accept a speaking role at a meeting 250 miles away, drive there and arrive fresh and ready to minister. I can return home after church, none worse for the wear.

I am an older more established minister. I also have a home w/a mortgage like everyone else. However to a new fledgling evangelist, his car is his home! His front seat is his living room.His back seat is where his wife and kids catnap while he drives to the next meeting. The "Lincoln" is their house on wheels. Why would you begrudge them the little bit of comfort their transient lifestyle can afford them?

$500 suits? I think if the suit price is in balance with their income, why shouldn't God bless any of His children with good things? If their lives, their giving, etc. is in balance with the Word of God,why would you want to limit the blessings that God has for them? If Malachi states that obedience in giving results in God opening up the windows of Heaven, why should we be critical?

Are you suggesting that we issue a car guide, a clothing guide, a housing guide to ministers? Should all of us have to conform to your idea of what's permissible or not? Perhaps you indulge yourself in ways that I might find offensive?

[Oldpreach]

"Are you suggesting that we issue a car guide, a clothing guide, a housing guide to ministers? Should all of us have to conform to your idea of what's permissible or not? Perhaps you indulge yourself in ways that I might find offensive?"

Yes , i ll publish a guide for you Brother...here it is !

List of items permissible For Bro. Yohe:

Car-- The one you have. Sounds like you know how to buy a car. Since my business is commercial transportation , i know a bit about that at least !

Clothes-- If the last picture i have seen of you is any indicator , you look very nice ! I believe from the suit color the pic was fromthe 70's or something , poke poke;) I would suggest carcoal , grey , or navy...oh yes , navy with tan slacks ! This would fit you coloring. NO pinstripes for you...no...no.

Housing -- Again , the one you have ! Brother , if your still paying on you house at your age , you MUST have earned it ! ;) again. NO ONE need to apologize if they are blessed in owning a house. Many of us , including myself until about a year ago , wished we could make a reasonable house.


Of couse we all have stories of abuse when it comes to money given as tithe and offering. Ok , if we had more elders in leadership roles , i think this would really help with this.

[tufluv]

GOSH, where is that church? $500 suits, yikes!
I KNOW it ain't in the AAFCJ...never seen one of them yet, although nice cars, aren't exactly extinct, either.
Hmmm...be nice, brethren!

[pastorb]

Yes it is, It's at the AAFCJ, PAW, UPC, and everywhere else unless you are amish.

I like looking good and wearing at least $350.00 suits because my wife won't let me buy a $500.00 one, but if she did I would, and the ministry I support would not suffer at all.

I have been blessed with a beautiful 4 bedroom 2100 sqft home and I am presently looking for a new one hoping to move by September.

I work hard and I preach hard, I am dedicated to God and his people.

I forgot My wife and I were talking last night on the way to work, I am about to buy to vehicles a 15 Passenger Van fro the church and a Navigator for meeeeeeeeeee.

I don't think God will be at all disappointed with that as long as I tend to his business first and he'll bless me in mine.

We need to stop thinking preachers should live hand to mouth.

How many have portfolio's and have there churches report to Dun and Bradberry? Are you banking the money or are you putting it to work for the ministry? Remember the parable of the talent, what are you doing to bring about an increase outside of a bake sale and chicken dinner? It's time to rise above that so that all of God's people can be blessed and not just the preacher.

Hold finance and budgeting classes when you teach on tithing. Teach about interest and how to buy a car or house. It's sad that so many are ignorant concerning these life issues. How many saints have life insurance for their families in the event of tragity?

If we want to talk money lets go all the way and teach the saints while we are at it. I've got home owners and a financial investor and Military folks in my church and we need to be able to help and preach to more than just pay check to pay check saints.

[Nawbee]

OK, I'm in a hurry so I'll hit this one quickly...

The verse that tell women to not speak up in church was the result of women sitting on one side of a aisle and men on another. In the middle of the preaching, the women, not knowing church edicate would shout across the aisles to their husbands and disrupt the service.

;)

An Apostle is one who is sent to a specific group of people with a specific Message from Christ Himself, right?

Matthew 28:5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.

6 He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. 7 And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you.

8 And they departed quickly from the sepulcher with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word. 9 And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshiped him. 10 Then said Jesus unto them, Be not afraid: go tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me.

Hmm...

A group of women are then the first Apostles...

:D

[Adoniyah]

Sister Cooper,

I would never think less of a preacher simply because of the car he drives, the expensive suit he wears nor mansion that he lives in. In fact, from my heart, I would rejoice that the Lord had so favored him.

Every good and perfect gift comes down from, where...?

It is a lesser of a person that would look on the possessions of another and begrudge him/her of that blessing. It is a liberal soul that will secretly rejoice if he happens to notice how that God has wonderfully blessed another preacher in material things.

I would to God that all of God's messengers could drive the finest, even Rolls Royces should they choose, live in the finest of homes and not have to wear those cheap $500. suits.

But then, herein lies a great temptation. Worldly wealth has a way of destroying a ministry, even destroying the soul of the minister. I have seen it.

When a messenger of God is TRULY sold out to the work of God, he will invariably choose a less opulent life style for the sake of souls at home and abroad, using his personal wealth for the cause of God in places that he will never visit.

[In His Service]

Amen Brother,
I don't want any minister doing without his needs met. But I too have seen it time and time again, and and not near your age, where Pastor's get caught up with the "Keeping with the Jones". When the baptist minister down the road gets a new car, then they feel they have to have a new one or people will think God is not blessing them but is blessing the baptist.

The more possessions that one feels they need the more thought is given to expanding thier collection and less time one expanding the house of God. I have seen churches that where in dire need of work and repair that set in that need, while the ministery and the saints both went out and where buying new cars while the ones they had where only a few years old.

Then we have those that put so much money into how thier home looks, thier cars, even the church being to richly appointed and nothing is ever given to help others who are in need.

Moderation in all things. Middle of the line in our choices so that we stay balanced is the key.

Thanks again for your post,
Bro. Timothy

[stmatthew]

Amen Bro Strange!!

Compassion for humanity will cause a man to forsake all, and follow Jesus, who forsook all, and became the greatest missionary example known to man.

While I believe every saint should be milloinaires, I also see that if my brother or sister in Brazil, or Mexico, or where ever, is hungry and in need, can I withhold what I have been blessed with. True stewardship is to do the will of the Father, not just increase our portfilio. And before anyone gets a rope, I am not saying a portfolio is wrong, unless you shut up you bowels of compassion and are not willing to use it for the Kingdom.

I heard one missionary say how funny it was to him that Americans measure their blessing by how much money and possessions they have. He stated that his people looked at the American church as Laodecean.

[Nawbee]

But what about paying women preachers?

;)

[Faithchild]

In His Service, again the concept of "moderation" is individual and is based upon the financial "means" of that person. Perhaps envy causes such a harsh negative judgment on ministers. If they are "out of balance" the natural forces of bankruptcy and foreclosure will soon take care of the situation. Let's quit wasting time in trying to change each other and dedicate more time to changing the world around us. Let's not be a city set on a hill with it's lights out.

[In His Service]

Faith,
What harsh negative judgement? I am a minister myself and understand how we need to base our walk with moderation in all things.

Out of balance does not mean that one has to buy it all on credit though. Even if a saint or minister has a large income coming in, there is to be moderation in thier decisions. When a modest home in a medium income area would suit someone just fine, do they decide they want a bigger home than they would have to have, in an area of higher priced homes? The amount of money that a saint or minister could but the lower cost home, for example that will suit their needs well could be used to help others who are suffering. The price differnence could well build a church in a foriegn land and many could be blessed.

I like what someone just said. In other countries they look at americans as odd because they look to possessions, and the better or higher priced as being blessed.

I don't hold against anyone that might have a newer home than I or any other such. I do see the keeping up with the jones's spirit so much more in our church today. That saddens me greatly.

Prayers for all,
Bro. Timothy

[Xerf]

FC when your right you are sooooooooo right!

(I just wish that this could have been one of those times)



:)

[bishop1]

Yes ;
I drive a Lincoln Town Car that was given to me with only 31,000 miles on it. It replaced a 1995 Lincoln Town Car that had over 300,000 miles and body damage {that also was given to me}. I have driven a Yugo, Peugeot, LeCar, Escort, VW, Pontiac, Ford, Hundai, Porsche, Saab, Volvo, Cadillac, Buick, Dodge, DeSoto, Mercury, Studebaker, Rambler, Kaiser, Chrysler, Plymouth, Imperial, Oldsmobile, Austin Healey, M.G., Opel, Chevrolet.

I will drive any type car that the Lord provides for me. The Lord has provided free transportation, free limo service and my wife has even had to push my car {to help start}. I have walked, hitch hiked, rode a donkey. pony, mule, horse, bike, motorcycle, boat , ferry, bus, van, trolly, plane, train, subway to Preach THIS APOSTOLIC GOSPEL.

Yes
I wear Nice Suits
They are provided for me by Walter Sewell Suit Company of Bremen Georgia
When I pastored in one city the mayor and I were the same size. He was a prominant attorney and never wore a suit more than twice. He found a favorable tax write-off by giving me his suits'
In my younger days I was the same size as a major league pitcher {that had Apostolic roots} and he kelp me outfitted in suits. God always provided.
Yes
I wear Nice Neck Ties
They are provided for me by Beau Bummel Company
I have yet to buy a tie
** I preached a two part Sunday A.M. Sermon on Tithing
{Before the sermom the entire conregatiom comes around the altar bringing their Tithes and Offering} and at the offering time of the second Sunday I noticed everybody laying a necktie upon the altar. One brother was very red faced and would not even look at me and I knew that he was behind this tie escapade.

I stated "before we start we need to know the difference between TIES and TITHES"

[pastorb]

Bishop1,

Would you or have you given the opportunity buy for yourself the same quality of suits that have been provided for you?

I have no problem with Ricco Inrocey Neck ties at $75.00 dollars a piece, thier silk with the pocket square.

I can Appreciates Armani Virgin wool suits.

And I have bad feet and can't where cheap shoes so some nice Florshiems, cole n han's or maybe some ballys will work

Did I forget a nice Perry Ellis Dress Shirt.

No I don't pay full price for anything, We have a nice garment district in Los Angeles that can hook anybody up.

[In His Service]

pastor b,
You can get them cheaper on ebay!!
Bro. Timothy

[In His Service]

Ok, let us now lead this thread back to about women in a preaching or pastoring role.
Bro. Timothy

[Faithchild]

In His Service, my basic point in this thread is that "moderation" is a judgment call for the individual. The individual believer decides what is "in balance" for their own lifestyle. You and I shouldn't attempt to do it. Btw, how did such an ugly guy get such a good-looking wife?

Xerf, after I read your first line I knew the other shoe would drop sooner or later. I wasn't disappointed. But at least I'm right occasionally . . .

[foreverblessed]

Ah now Jim, you are just being mean now. :)

[bishop1]

PastorB;
No, I would never spend that type of money for a suit or a tie.
I am very hard to fit. You see I wear a size 48 XL suit, a size 18 neck /38" sleeve shirt', and size 11 1/2 B shoes. When someone gives me something that fits then I know that it is a gift from God.

I find bargains at inventory time, Dress shirts in open packages that are marked down because of soilage. I always get my shoes at outlet centers or at inventory time. I have learned to get shoes made in Maine, Italy, or Brazil. The Leather and workmanship is better. Never purchase shoes made in India, Pakistan, China, or Indonesa because they will not last.

If you purchase a suit visit the factories first then try S & K, Mens Whse, Or Burlington at clearance time and always insist on a matching tie. {usually given with the purchase}.

[committed]

Third and ddc,
That was great from both of you!! Make them answer.......ha ha
Not all women can fight back like that....it certainly makes one think, even though I was always taught against women preachers it certainly causes one to think doesn't it??

[bishop1]

IT WAS NOT SO IN THE BEGINNING.

God is Absolute.

Moses gave a bill of divorcement because of the hardness of the heart. JESUS said that it was not so from the beginning.

I have a good friend that is a Successful Presbyterian Pastor and they tell me that he is doing a good job.
I hear that XX Church has a Woman Pastor and a Lady Preacher told my wife that Alabama is a good place for Lady Preachers and that they do a good job.

WHAT WILL REALLY MATTER IS WHAT GOD THINKS ABOUT IT.

DOES IT REALLY MATTER ?

GODS WAY OR NO WAY !

[In His Service]

Sister Third,
I know that one day soon we will agree on something, :~) I will answer your points in blue below.

Why did the apostles choose between two men and no women when replacing Judas?

I would suggest that although Jesus changed everything; everything was not going to change overnight. The new Christians initially brought much of their Jewish understanding into their decision making process. Careful what you suggest to make sure that it is found in the Word of God. We don’t see that Jesus Changed everything, we read He full filled a great deal and began new things. Did these new things including adding women to the leadership of the Church? The bible will direct us to answer, NO!

It is interesting to note that making a choice by lot was never seen again after the Holy Ghost fell.

In the earliest times of the church, they were still unaware that the Gentiles were going to be a part of the church. The account of Cornelius did not take place until the tenth chapter; the Samaritans and the Eunich in the eighth.

Many people may not realize that under the OT, the Eunich was forbiden in God's house (Deut 23:1).

So in the 1st chapter of Acts, the actions of the apostles were still very much in keeping with their Jewish roots. To look for a woman to minister was just about as unthinkable as Gentiles, Eunichs and Samaritans becoming Abraham's seed. While this sounds good on the surface we can find in the Word of God where the Gentiles and the Eunichs and the Samaritans, and even Women could be part of the church. However we will not find a placing in scripture for women to lead the church by being part of the five fold ministry. They are shown to have a great place in the body of Christ but being over the body is not one of them.

Consequently, when Paul speaks of Phoebe a "servant" of Cenchrea Church (Romans 16:1); we must acknowledge that the radical transformation taking place in the NT church included women working in the church as able ministers. In a moment I will address the issue of Sister Phoebe. Now though I ask why must we acknowledge something that is not true, that women where to be part of the leadership of the church. Some like to use the title minister to mean someone that just shares the good news with any that might ask or want to know. Others use it to identify the set aside leadership of the church, the five fold ministry. Could I ask which you would classify minister as?

Please note that the Greek word translated into the Word "servant" in this verse was in most cases translated as minister or deacon elsewhere. Let us look at the facts of this statement,
From Strong’s

1249 diakonos dee-ak'-on-os probably from an obsolete diako (to run on errands; compare 1377); an attendant, i.e. (genitive case) a waiter (at table or in other menial duties); specially, a Christian teacher and pastor (technically, a deacon or deaconess):--deacon, minister, servant. [color=green] We should take note that the usage of teacher or pastor in the above is not backed by the Word of God, and they even show in Strong’s that technically they are saying a Deacon here

Places we find the usage of 1249 above.
Matt 23:11 But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.

Mark 9:35 And he sat down, and called the twelve, and saith unto them, If any man desire to be first, the same shall be last of all, and servant of all.

John 8:35 35. And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever.

Roman 16:1 I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea:
We can see from these usages that when Paul was speaking of Phebe that he was speaking of her running errands, being and attendant or waiter. He is not speaking of her as leading a church or being part of the 5 fold ministry. He further clarifies this if we look closely at what he speaks as to her service being, a succor. Verse two speaks of how she was a servant to the church in and to Paul and others. 2. That ye receive her in the Lord, as becometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath need of you: for she hath been a succourer of many, and of myself also.

"succourer":
4368 prostatis pros-tat'-is feminine of a derivative of 4291; a patroness, i.e. assistant:--succourer. What is a patroness? A wealth person who helps to support someone, who uses their wealth to help others. Her being wealthy would lend support to why she would seemingly have been traveling alone and not with a husband. Her being able to travel as Paul would have asked her to deliver the letter also would support that she could travel freely as she desired over long distances if need be. Also her delivering the Romans letter to them from Paul shows that Paul was speaking of her as a one that ran errands for him and others. Not a menial task, but as we see with taking this important letter to the Roman Church a vital help to the Ministry.

So we see plainly from the Word of God that Phebe did not have a place within the five fold ministry but had a very important work to do in the church.


As to the Apostle issue- Why didn't God see fit to have a Gentile apostle? Should we attach relevance to that? Yes, most certainly and the Word of God address this. God came to the Jewish nation. The Promise was to the Jewish nation first. He called the Apostles from the chosen people. When the Jews rejected him, the scriptures where fulfilled and the Gentiles where grafted in as foretold. To the Jews first we must remember, then to the Gentiles.

Or do we recognize that the 12 Apostles were representative of the 12 patriarchs of old (the sons of Jacob)? Do we realize that to have selected a Gentile at the beginning of Jesus' ministry would have created great doubt in the minds of those he came to minister to (Matthew 15:24)? Again see above, for to call a gentile at the beginning would have gone against the Word of God, God’s ordained order. This however does not have anything to do with Women being part of the Five fold ministry

What did the OT have to say about the status of women in the NT? What was foreshadowed?

Beginning in the Garden of Eden, we find that even as God told the women how bad life was going to be for her outside the garden; he assured her that delivery was coming.

And I will put enmity between thee and the woman; and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head and thou shall bruise his heel (Gen 3:15).

Thus Christ was foreshadowed to redeem whosoever will. And with redemption, comes a clean slate. Is that not true?

In fact, even before redemption God said He was going to look at the individuals and not punish individuals for the sins of their fathers. See the 18th chapter of Ezekiel. [c

Thus one would have to wonder what has the sin of Eve got to do with a blood bought, Spirit filled woman? I say absolutely nothing.
A clean slate from sin, Sure, most certainly!!!!! To think that it does away with what was spoken of in Genesis is pure fantasy. Sister have you had any children at all? If so did you go through any pain while you delivered? If so how do you then think that Genesis 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
Do we find anywhere in scriptures that shows that this what was spoken of by God was done away with? No, nothing what so ever, but we find that the New Testament further states the same things.


For we are all NEW CREATURES in Christ (2 Cor 5:17).
Result of search for "creature":
2937 ktisis ktis'-is from 2936; original formation (properly, the act; by implication, the thing, literally or figuratively):--building, creation, creature, ordinance.

16. Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more.
17. Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

It is erroneous to try to substantiate that 2 Cor 5:17 is speaking of people not being a literal male or female after obeying the truth. It is clearly speaking when we read verse 16 with it that we do not look at a persons past, not what their flesh did. The person that was known as Bob or Mary, is still Bob or Mary but we don’t remember their old ways and sins for they are washed away. So clearly shown and stated.

continued below

[In His Service]

Was this radical shift from women as second class citizens foreshadowed in the OT? Absolutely. I am not sure why you feel that the women where second class citizens as dealing with the Jewish people. True that God did have an ordained order that had the men as head of the women and their leaders. What is wrong with God’s order. A vitreous women price we are told was far above rubies.

God initially selected only males of the Levite tribe to be priests. But he told Israel that he wanted to make them a kingdom of priests (Ex 19:6). Initially? God only ordained the males of the levite tribe to be the only priest for the whole Jewish nation up until the cross. That never changed but it did not make women second class in any way, shape or form. It followed God’s divine order, male first and then women under the man. Not in a negative way but in a guarded and wonderful way.

Your thoughts that Ex. 19:6 is speaking of something in the New Testament has no backing. This is clearly speaking of the Levitical priesthood that was soon to be consecrated to the service of God and to lead the nation spiritually.

Peter told the NT church (including women) that indeed we were now a royal priesthood (1 Peter 1:9). It is obvious that we need to understand what is being expressed with the use of “Priesthood” here. He know that the need for the office of priest or mediator was taken care of at the cross. The NT church has no office of priest as it did in the OT. We are new born believers who have obeyed the gospel can now boldly approach the throne.
Hebrews 4: 14. Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
15. For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
16. Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need. Because Jesus became our high priest and took upon himself the office of the priesthood he finished that dispensation. The veil was rent and now we might all come into the place of the holy of holies with none excluded. Does that mean that all are called to lead the church? No, not at all. It means that we are the Body of Christ might all be found able to enter into the Holy of Holies and come before the Throne. He still has an ordained order on who leads the church just as in the days of old. The church is a church of order and that order is given by God. The five fold ministry leads the church and the Word tells us that men are to hold those offices.

Only men were circumcised in the OT. But in the NT, the circumcision of the heart was for all (Col 3:11-14).
Many who would want the Word to support women taking a place in the five fold ministry pull this section of scriptures out to try and support their position that God does not look at us humans now as male and female. They fail to read down just a few verses to see that this is not speaking of their not being a distinction between the sexes. It is speaking that all might be able to come unto the Throne of Grace.

Lets read,
18. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.
19. Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them.
20. Children, obey your parents in all things: for this is well pleasing unto the Lord.
21. Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged.
22. Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God:
23. And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men;
24. Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ.
25. But he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done: and there is no respect of persons. if verse 11 was speaking that there was no longer male or female, bond or free in reality of our place in the family or society then these scriptures would not be needed. They however show quiet clearly that there is still distinction in our persons but not in our place in the promises of God.

Joel prophesied that God was going to pour out His Spirit upon all; whereas in the past God's annoiting was upon a few chosen leaders. Sister do you really want to try to make the argument that what was spoke of by the Prophet Joel and spoken of coming to pass in Acts has to deal with the leadership of the Church? I thought it had to do with all being able to be filled with the Holy Ghost? The pouring out of the Spirit upon all that would believe the truth gave mankind a new hope of the Promise. It in no way changed God’s ordained order at all. We find so many scriptures written to the church on how to conduct itself that speak this as so.

But realize that ALL of these radical transformations took place after the church was born, not when Jesus was ministering on earth.

And so the NT church was born in the midst of Jewish culture by putting on Christ. In doing so they lost their identity as male or female, Jew or Greek, bond or free (Gal 3:28). This meant that the Jewish constraints placed upon women for thousands of years were broken and women had an equal right to partake at the table and SERVE. Again see the above concerning the ideas that Gal 3:28 along with other settings of scripture is not stating that there are no more male or female, bond or free in our daily lives. It was not Jewish constraints, remember it was God’s instructions on how to govern the chosen people. The cross did not change that a women was still to be in subjection to her husband, that the husband was the head of the home, that a women would still suffer in childbirth and that Men where ordained to be the leaders of God’s people. Women always where a vital part of the chosen people as they followed their ordained places and order as God directed in the OT. Women have a vital place in the NT church in a mighty work of Serving the Body of Christ along with the men that are not called to lead the Church. They are not however called to LEAD the church and the entire NT writings of God support that.

Last but not least;; an overlooked portion of Job, also foreshadowed women's eqaulity in Christ.

Remember Job initially had 7 sons and 3 daughters? Looking at the numbers, some would find that seven was the number that completed the beginning of the OT when God created the earth and three was the number that ushered in the NT upon the death, burial and ressurection of Christ.

With that in mind consider that in the first chapter of Job, we find that when his kids got together, the sisters visited their brother's houses. Presumably because they did not have one of their own.

But in the last chapter of Job, when God is blessing him with a double portion.... we find a most exraordinary thing occuring with Job's new set of children.

And in the land there were no daughters as fair as the daughters of Job: AND THEIR FATHER GAVE THEM AN INHERITANCE AMONG THEIR BROTHERS (Job 42:15).
I urge you sister to step back and look at what you are saying. It is the inheritance at the end that is being spoken of!!!!!!! Not the leadership while on this earth but what the inheritance that awaits those called by his name in the end. To get that inheritance we have to follow all the Word of God. We have to understand God’s ordained order and how he set up the church. Not how you would set it up or someone else might, but how it is shown clearly that God desired it to be.

Time and time again people try to pull something out of the Word to support their ideas that simply is not there. The want to add to what is written to say that it probably meant this or that. When clearly it is stated point blank quiet another way.

Let that sink in. It was unheard of and specifically and pointedly recorded in Scripture. Indeed, the NT church was a radical change form the face of Judiasm. But isn't that what Christianity is all about? We are indeed, new creatures in Christ.


Let’s rightly divide the Word of Truth and it will clearly show us that man made ideas, or women’s are just that, ideas, while God’s Word is concrete and forever settled in Heaven.
More later,
Bro. Timothy

[ThirdGeneration]

In His Service! Great, just when I was going to scale back at the Cafe! I will respond, but Bishop posted first....

"It was not so in the Beginning."

Bishop, let's take a closer look at God's original plan.....

Let us re-examine a familiar story that too many have accepted as the natural basis of male superiority and leadership (even if not so labeled).

Too many think that God made Adam and then created as "helper," Eve. This is because much was lost in the translation from the Hebrew to King James English use of "help mete" in Genesis 2:18.

But the reality is that the word "help" in Hebrew (ezer) is not used in the Bible to refer to a subordinate helper, but rather used in reference to God as our helper (Psalms 121:1-2; see also Deut 33:7, 26, 29; Psalms 33:20; 70:5; 115:9-11; and 146:5).

The word, "neged" is a proposition in Hebrew best translated as, "corresponding to"; "fit for"; or "meet for." The actual idea being that Eve was an appropriate, fitting partner for Adam; not his inferior helper.

Furthermore, the order of creation does not suggest that man is superior in ability or authority. The reality is that God created living things in an ascending order of complexity. Thus, if order meant anything, it would have to mean that Eve was actually superior because she was last!

It should also be noted that Eve's subordination to Adam did not occur before the fall, but rather after. God gave both Adam and Eve dominion over the earth (Gen 1:29). This would have been the perfect time to tell Eve that she was under Adam's dominion if that were the case.

But the reality is that Adam and Eve were equal partners in the Garden with equal access to God; both had been given the same dominion over earth. They were created to be as "one."

That was God's ORIGINAL plan before mankind was tainted by the sin that Christ would redeem us from and before there ever was a Hebrew nation that forged a culture made up of God's law and their leanings as imperfect human beings.

Consider what Jesus said about divorce which Moses allowed under the law. "Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives; BUT FROM THE BEGINNING IT WAS NOT SO (Matt 19:8).

In other words, the Hebrew culture's uneven treatment of men and women was not always God's original intent, even if the law eventually allowed for it.

Thus Christ came to set the captive free....

[In His Service]

Third,
Why are you stuck on saying that we are saying a man is superior to a women? I do not believe that at all. It is not biblical. The are to work as one flesh. God did set the man to be over the women in leadership and as head of the home. There can not be two heads, only one. Does that mean the women is inferior? NO!!!! It means that she understand that God have her a husband to be her leader, protector, guide and teacher.

This discussion trying to lean toward I or others saying that women are inferior because God said that men are to lead the church is not a valid point in any way. Let us stick with what the Bible says.

Bro. Timothy

[Faithchild]

Foreverblessed, they were asking for it.

Bishop1, In His Service, give up now while you still have some dignity left. No one wins on this one but ThirdGen. The Bible has a pesky way of backing up her points.

I know (It's still painful).

[ThirdGeneration]

IHS- Bishop brought up the beginning and I thought it would be a good foundation to start with.

I doubt that too many people have ever heard that the Hebrew word, "ezer" was most often used for divine help rather than homemaker assistance or Girl Friday status!

My post was meant to show that the original plan of God was equality, not a hierchy as too many assume. The man and woman were perfectly suited for each other and no headship items were brought up until AFTER the fall.

Points made are not necesarily directed at a particular poster, but meant to cover all basis, as much as possible.

Btw- You have yet to show where God said only men were to lead the church!

[Faithchild]

In His Service, I once disregarded the wise advice of Adoniyah and took on the Mighty Gen on the Women In Ministry Issue. You'll find the tattered remains of my traditional arguments decomposing on the ancient battlegrounds of the GNC Archives. Read'em. Weep. And then gracefully retreat as soon as possible. Your lovely wife deserves a complete man without a shattered ego.

Don't cry for me, Ar-GEN-tina!
(I'm in recovery and in hiding.)

[searching]

It's hard for me to see Faithchild admitting defeat....what a man!!!

Me...

[ThirdGeneration]

Faithchild- You are a scream! :beammeup:

[ThirdGeneration]

IHS- I have some work deadlines that prevent me from carefully answering your posts today. I will get back with you tonight or tomorrow. Have a great day! :)

[In His Service]

Dear third,
That will be fine.
Bro. Timothy

[bishop1]

I often wonder if ThirdGeneration
- has ever found
- a husband
- worthy of her instruction
- and leadership.

{sometimes I think my wife wonders that I am worthy of her}
I just keep reminding her
--- " that I am to love her And SHE IS TO OBEY ME "
* Thus Sayeth The WORD Of GOD. and So Be It

[Thelordisone]

Amen Bro. Tim on post 165!!

God Bless!!

[bishop1]

SO
I'M AN OLE CRANK < HUH >

I May Be An Ole Crank =
- - BUT -- --
I'm One Ole Crank
__ __That The Devil Can't Turn !

[In His Service]

Dear Third,
Please forgive me. I had forgotten that you had written the second post. I will answer it in the same manner as the previous post.

How could we conclude that God would favor one group over another in ministry if we are all equal before the cross of Calvary? Would we find God to be no respector of person if only non-Gentiles could lead? It is your idea of groups that seems to confuse many. The separation in the Word of God of male and female does not show a separation into a group or in reality what you are saying, class. The separation between male and female is in relation to the place within the order of marriage, the family, and the leadership ministry of the church. The matter of the equality of believers is in relationship to what the covenant of salvation and the hope of life eternal that is given.

Some have stated that the ministry and the gifts are not the same. I can find no Scriptural basis for a belief that "pulpit ministry" is something different from the gifts of the Spirit . No offence intended, but you have got to be kidding here right? You are stating that the leadership of the church, the five fold ministry is the same thing as the Gifts of the Spirit?

Eph 4:11. And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12. For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13. Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: IT seems pretty straightforward to me.

Could I ask you to break down 1 Cor. 12 verse by verse or section by section and tell me how you interpret it please? It would help to see how you are understanding this setting of scriptures.


After carefully considering what Paul wrote, I find that the gifts of the Spirit are an individual's ministry. Do you feel that each and every person who is part of the body of Christ will be used in the Gifts of the Spirit? Not could them be, but will they be?

Consider that we are all a royal priesthood (1 Peter 2:9); and given the ministry of reconciliation (2 Cor 5:18). Thus, I believe we minister to others by the Spiritual gifting we are given. I spoke of the priesthood in the previous answering to your other post. It still seems that you are confusing the workings of the Spiritual gifts with the role that God set for the leadership of the church, the five fold ministry. How do you explain this? I do believe that all of the body of Christ can minister one to another in many ways. I would not dispute that at all. It seems your argument would hinge on the use of “minister” to show you believe in women being ordained to lead the church. I have had many women minister to me by encouraging me during a difficult time. It a very important work for them to do that that time. Did that make them part of the leadership of the church, or a worker in the Body of Christ? A worker of course. [/blue]

Indeed, Paul recognized that his ministry was a gift from God. He stated, "I was made a MINISTER, according to the GIFT OF THE GRACE of God given unto me by the effectual working of HIS power (Eph 3:7).

We already know that "The manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man [gender neutral] to profit withal" (1 Cor 12:7). We also know that the gift of leadership is encompassed in these gifts. [color=blue] The Manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. What is the manifestation of the Spirit? I would appreciate if you would answer that to clarify what you are wanting to say it is?

6 Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether PROPHECY, let us wait on prophecy according to the proportion of faith;

7 Or MINISTRY, let us wait on our ministering: or he that teacheth, on TEACHING;

8 Or he that EXHORTETH on exhortation; he that giveth, let him do it with simplicity; he that RULETH, with diligence; he that showeth mercy with cheerfulness (Romans 12:6-8). Is this the setting of scripture that you would like to use to list the gifts of the Spirit? Are you aware that the use of ministry above is in relation to being a deacon? diakonia

To base your usage that women are to be part of the leadership of the church in reality would show that the deacons where to lead the church. The deacons where servants to wait upon the tables. The deacon did an important service to the Church but they did not lead the church. Someone who was a deacon could also be used in other ways. This is an non correct usage and does not mirror what we find as directed about the leadership of the church anywhere in the Word of God.

Paul broght up "the ministry" in his list of gifts of the Spirit in the 12th chapter of 1 Corinthians. (See 1 Cor 12:28-31) There is nothing to indicate that he saw a difference between ministry and gifts of the Spirit. (See 1 Cor 12; Romans 12; and Eph 4). see above

Incidently, these chapters that speak of ministry in the body of Chirst need to be read with Greek dictionary in hand. Thus one learns that man or men are neutral as to gender rather than specific as they could have been if Paul so intended.

Finally, let's not forget that His Spirit baptizes us into the body. There does not appear to be separate drinking fountains. For by one Spirit have we all been baptized into one body....and have all been made to DRINK INTO ONE SPIRIT (1 Cor 12:13). We all may have the Spirit of God living in us. We all are also to follow the given Word of God on how we conduct ourselves and when God wrote to the men he separated them by gender, to the women he separated by gender and when neutral they where combined.

Gender is not an issue in the body of Christ since we are all NEW CREATURES in Christ (2 Cor 5:16) that have put on the NEW MAN which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness (Eph 4:24). [color=blue] You can not show with the Word of God that gender is not an issue in the Body of Christ. So many places that I could list here and fill page after page speaks to gender specifics as to what is expected of that gender. How do you deny this? We become a new building for God to fill. Be become a child of God. If we put on the new man then we will not have trouble accepting and following God’s given Word and instructions. To think that God does not look a mankind and see us as men and women and speak to each about gender specific areas is to deny what is written.
More later, but I wanted to know if you think a women can be an evangelist? Does the Word of God speak of the office of evangelist as a male or female role?

Prayers your way,
Bro. Timothy

[Nawbee]

1 Timothy 2:9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with braided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array.

10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.

12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

First, who is "the man"???

Then we'll tackle the rest...

;)

[bishop1]

NAWBEE;

I Timothy 2:9/10
This is a couple of scriptures that some Apostolics do not know
are even in their Bible.

[Nawbee]

NOW they know...

;)

Who's "the man"?

[Xerf]

Yeah, last time I heard a woman teach I suffered greatly!!




























:jk: ladies

[bishop1]

I once tried to listen to a
LadyTalker
LadyPreacher
whatever you would respectfully call her - -

And after the 15th = "I Told Him"
and the eleventh = "I pointed my finger in his face"
and the seventh = "we're gonna do it my way"

Then I knew exactly her husband was not Saved.

[ddc101]

Bishop1,
Probably your mother preached at you all your life and taught you much as well.
I say as the old saying goes....the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world.If women only knew how much power there is in being a good mother.The world is in such sad shape ever since the poor mother had to leave the home to help feed the family since the government sent her provider to war.Go figure...blame the government...lv sis.c

[bishop1]

How did you know that she thought that she
was a lady preacher?
Both she and my Aunt Lela Held Papers with the 'U'nder 'P'rivileged 'C'hildren 'I'delogy

BUT GOD
delivered me !

I spent most of my time {8/13} on my grandpa
Hollands farm. {near the home church}
The Church where I was Baptized in the Name
Of JESUS and where I received the Gift of The
Tongue Talking Holy Ghost !

[ThirdGeneration]

IHS- I will try to address each of the areas you question in smaller bite size posts.

However, I would like to point out that a brick is not a wall. That means that although some of the items I originally spoke of may not prove conclusively, that God can and will use women in ministry; they nevertheless contribute to a fuller understanding of the big picture. Thus we have a better idea of how God views women in the NT church.

WHAT ABOUT PHOEBE????___________________________

I spoke of Phoebe because she was a woman listed in a long list of those that had ministered with Paul in the sixteenth chapter of Romans. History shows us that the Pharisees did not find women worthy to talk to. Yet Paul, a former Pharisee acknowledged her work in the church at Cenchrea (Romans 16:1).

No matter what she did; that was a radical shift from the second class citizenship that had been the lot of women at the time that Jesus walked the earth.

(Btw-2nd class status could be seen in the amount of legal rights women had-ALMOST NONE and the contempt shown for them by society at large and the the Pharisees in particular).

So at the very least, Phoebe shows that there were new doors of opportunity opened to women as fellow workers in the church. However, I believe Phoebe actually represents an even greater truth. I believe Phoebe was in a position of leadership.

IHS----> posts the definition "From Strong’s

1249 diakonos dee-ak'-on-os probably from an obsolete diako (to run on errands; compare 1377); an attendant, i.e. (genitive case) a waiter (at table or in other menial duties); specially, a Christian teacher and pastor (technically, a deacon or deaconess):--deacon, minister, servant."

But IHS continues to editorialize that Strongs got it wrong!

IHS---> "We should take note that the usage of teacher or pastor in the above is not backed by the Word of God, and they even show in Strong’s that technically they are saying a Deacon here"

Did Strongs get it wrong? I think not. The problem was Phoebe's work has been obscured by poor translation. The KJV uses the word "servant" for the Greek word, "diakonos" which appeared 20 times in Paul's letters.

Sixteen times it was translated as "minister" and in 3 cases it was translated as "deacon." Only ONE time in the case of Phoebe, was it translated as "servant."

So let's look at a few of the other verses where Paul uses the same Greek word (#1249 diakonos dee-ak'-on-os ) and consider the his use of the word in context.

Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but MINISTERS by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man (1 Cor 3:5)?

Whereof I was made a MINISTER, according to the gift of grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power (Eph 3:7).

But that ye may also know my affairs, and how I do, Tychicus, a beloved brother and faithful MINISTER in the Lord, shall make known to you all things (Eph 6:21).

And sent Timotheus, our brother, and MINISTER of God, and our fellow laborer in the gospel of Christ, to establish you, and to comfort you concerning your faith (1 Thes 3:2).

How could we not find it interesting that MEN in the middle ages chose to use the word "servant" in Romans 16:1; contrary to the translation of diakones the other nineteen times Paul used it?

Next IHS points out what Jesus had to say when he used the word, diakones. He points to--->

Matt 23:11 But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.

Mark 9:35 And he sat down, and called the twelve, and saith unto them, If any man desire to be first, the same shall be last of all, and servant of all.

John 8:35 35. And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever.

Ok, we can certainly see that Jesus wasn't talking about those that wait on tables when he spoke of the greatest and least; but rather speaking of the APOSTLES MINISTERING (Matt and Mark).

And indeed, John 8:35 speaks of the servant (of a household) that waits on tables! But how does one logically come to that kind of conclusion about Phoebe?

IHS says of Romans 16:1 ----> "We can see from these usages that when Paul was speaking of Phebe that he was speaking of her running errands, being and attendant or waiter. He is not speaking of her as leading a church or being part of the 5 fold ministry."

Generally you don't tell people, carte blanche, to "assist her in whatsoever business she hath need of you" (Romans 16:2) if they are there to wait on tables and run errands. ROFLOL

I cannot imagine that Paul would have entrusted her to take a letter to Rome if she were not someone with authority.

Consider that when the Acts 15 council met and sent letters to the churches; they carefully chose Paul and Barnabas; already prominent ministers in the church; to deliver the letters (Acts 15:25).

In the second verse, Paul spoke of Phoebe as a "succourer."

The Greek word "prostatis" occurs only once in the New Testament, so we have no other Biblical passage to compare it. From classical Greek writings on through patristic writings it is used in its masculine form as chief, the leader of a party, one who stands before and protects, champion, defender, ruler, leader, supporter. The word is rare in its femenine form for obvious reasons: women did not hold positions of power in Greek culture. Thayers Greek Lexicon meaning for the word as "a woman set over other." (Women Be Free, Gundry 1977).

IHS writes -----> "So we see plainly from the Word of God that Phebe did not have a place within the five fold ministry but had a very important work to do in the church."

No sir, I don't plainly see what you see. I do not think that any Tom, Dick, or Harry carried Paul's letters to the churches.

Phoebe was no more an errand runner than Timothy, whom Paul requested bring some of his things to him (2 Tim 4:12) and Tychicus refered to as "beloved brother and faithful minister and fellowservant in the Lord", who delivered Paul's epistle to the Colosians (Col 4:7-8).

Next topic tomorrow night.....

[bishop1]

Somebody got it wrong -

BUT

GOD DID'NT !

[ThirdGeneration]

Originally posted by bishop1
I often wonder if ThirdGeneration
- has ever found
- a husband
- worthy of her instruction
- and leadership.

Bishop! :sb:

Thank you for the concern. ThirdGeneration has actually been married a long, long time.

Amazing as it seems, her husband still gets the car keys when they are in the same vehicle!

Btw- He did get a chuckle out of your sentiment!

[bishop1]

ThirdGeneration

Your husband got the post the way that it was intended.

This is for him;
Back in the 70's I was conducting a church wedding ceromony and as I got to the part
"Let any one speak or forever hold their peace"
The Groom Raised His Right Arm and Said
" PRAY FOR ME "

[Oldpreach]

Third , i just have to correct you in the below:


"Did Strongs get it wrong? I think not. The problem was Phoebe's work has been obscured by poor translation. The KJV uses the word "servant" for the Greek word, "diakonos" which appeared 20 times in Paul's letters.

Sixteen times it was translated as "minister" and in 3 cases it was translated as "deacon." Only ONE time in the case of Phoebe, was it translated as "servant."

Poor translation ??? Both the NIV and NASB render it servant here also....so just what major translation should we go to for a "not poor , or good translation???" Is there a major translation that reders it otherwise?

Im not sure how you arrived at this , but the search i have turns out like this:

AV - minister 20, servant 8, deacon 3; 31
Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon, (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.) 1995.

So , its not just servant one time. This is important because of the Lexicon definition i have here below:

1) one who executes the commands of another, esp. of a master, a servant, attendant, minister
1a) the servant of a king
1b) a deacon, one who, by virtue of the office assigned to him by the church, cares for the poor and has charge of and distributes the money collected for their use
1c) a waiter, one who serves food and drink
Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon, (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.) 1995.

I have no idea where folks get "pastor" and ect. out of Diakonos. The Greek for Pastor is a totally different word. The defintion you posted above is totally inconsistant if you look at the usage of the word thru - out the New test. The context is simply ALWAYS one of service. Also , where there is an inference of leadership in said service , its just that ; someone that was designated as a leader of a group or such that had duties.

Simply put , its quite obvious that Pheobe was a person of note in the new test church. She was deffinetly used in the "helps" type of government and deserved much respect. To say that she had a position over men is just not there...that would make it a fabrication at best. To say that she was a pastor(literal meaning: shepherd) is a leap also. So , what is there to say that she was without all the conjecture ?

Well ,

1 . "servant (diakonos)of the church which is at Cenchrea"
2 . "she hath been a succourer of many, and of myself also"
Succourer (prostatis:1) a woman set over others
2) a female guardian, protectress, patroness, caring for the affairs of others and aiding them with her resources.

If you add to this , you are doing just that , adding. What you can say more tho is that she is someone that was somewhat of a right hand woman (har har) to pual and to others. And what a noble and grand thing this is really ! Oh , all the unsung hero's out there of both genders ! THEY make up the backbone of the church ! They are the meat and potatoes if you will of the Church and are to be held in great esteem regardless of gender! So, we need to keep things in perspective. Pleez dont take this post as being exhaustive , i just cant be that way right now with limited time.

[justavessel4him]

As time permits, I would like to address some of the things Third Generation has written in her posts, but for now, I would like to share with you an article which I wrote for a woman's page of a newsletter recently. It is rather long, so I will post it in three parts. Here is the first one:

Submission or Subversion: part one
But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. I Corinthians 11:3

There seems to be a diversity of opinions as to exactly what a woman’s role in the church is. Views run the gamut from women are to be subservient to their husbands to women are equal to man and should have equal say in everything, and from women are to keep silent and never even quote the Bible or talk to anyone about salvation, to it’s okay for a woman to preach the Word of God and even pastor a church. Of course like any principle in God’s Word, the answer lies somewhere in the middle. God is a God of balance and order. To find the truth in this or any other area, we must rightly divide the Word.

Paul said in I Corinthians 12:18, But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him. There is a place and a vital function for every one of us in the body of Christ. It is our responsibility to make sure we know our place and operate within the boundaries of our ordained position. Of course we realize that each of us has an individual ministry within the body, but what we must also realize is that our individual job will be determined by and will be in accordance with the structure outlined in the Word of God. God will not call us to function in a capacity that is not in accordance to his Word. Each position or part of the body is just as important as another, and all are vital to the health and well being of the body. Verses 20-23 of the same chapter tell us, "But now are they many members, yet but one body. And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary: And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness." We, in our finite understanding and insight might assign more honor or importance to certain positions within the body, but God sees the little toe as just as important as any other part of the body and it is beautiful in his sight. If we are to fully understand our roles as women in God’s service, and not only be content in the place God has ordained for us we must grasp this truth. Our human understanding must be tempered by the Holy Ghost. We must come to see that God determines value in a much different manner than does the world or human reasoning. We must also be willing to acknowledge God’s sovereignty as supreme and complete. In other words, whatever he says goes even if it goes against the grain of our human reasoning and desires.

Another important principle we must understand is that the body of Christ, the Church, is a living organism made up of born again believers. It is not a set of meetings inside the church house doors. God does not have one order for the home, and one for the meeting place. It is true that there are specific instructions and guidelines given for how we are to conduct ourselves when we assemble to worship, but those do not deviate from God’s divine order set in place from the foundation of the world. Psalm 189:19 says, "For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven." Malachi 3:6 says in part, "For I am the Lord, I change not;" When God created mankind, he also created a divine order for humanity. He gave mankind dominion over the animals, and in fact gave them commandment to take dominion over the earth and every living thing therein. From that point forth mankind would have dominion over every living thing. We learn in the second chapter of Genesis that man was made first and because he needed a helpmeet, someone to be a helper to him, that God created woman out of one of Adam’s ribs and presented her to him. "...but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man." Woman was created to be a helper to man. Her role in life was established at the very moment of her creation. In the third chapter of Genesis, we find that because of her transgression woman was placed under the authority of her husband. "Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee." The very moment God spoke those words, they were forever settled in Heaven. From that moment forth woman would be under the rule of her husband. Woman would be under the authority of man. Of course, the world has deviated from this principle just as it has from other fundamentals of God’s word. The church world as a rule has also decided to change God’s order to suit the demands of society. Unfortunately, this reversal of God’s divine order for mankind has also crept it’s way into the Church. None of these things, however, change God’s word or the order that he established. Just as killing someone goes against the laws of God, so does woman usurping authority over man. If woman takes authority over a man it is sin. I John 3:4 says, Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. The law of God is more than just the ten commandments, or the Jewish law. Webster’s definition of law in part is, "a rule of conduct or action established by custom or laid down and enforced by a government authority: the revelation of the divine will set forth in the Old Testament, and a rule or principle of construction or procedure." When God created the universe many laws were put into effect. Light was divided from darkness, the law of gravity was put into play, the moon was set on course around the earth, etc. When God created man first and then created woman to be a helpmeet for man God’s law that woman came from man to be a helper for him was established. When God uttered the words, "and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee" were spoken the law was established that man would have dominion over woman and she must submit to that rule. God has not changed his mind. That law is still in effect today.

[justavessel4him]

Subversion or Submission Part II

For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands:

Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement. I Peter 3:5-6

In the above verses Peter uses Sarah, wife of the patriarch Abraham as an example to New Testament women, to you and I. He tells us we are daughters of Abraham, daughters of the promise as long as we do well. As long as we follow our sister, Sarah, and do good we are heirs to the promise. Sarah being in submission to Abraham called him Lord. Strong’s Concordance defines the word Kuros, Lord, as meaning, "Supreme in authority, i. e. controller; by implication Sir (as a respectful title): God, Lord, master, Sir." From this definition, we can see that when Sarah referred to her husband as lord, she was not only showing him respect, but acknowledging that he was her controller, or master. He was the boss.

In these verses, Peter is telling us the same thing Paul was saying in the eleventh chapter of First Corinthians when he said, "But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." verse 3, and again in Ephesians 5:22-24, "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing." Notice that it says in every thing. We can better understand what this means by taking a little closer look at Sarah’s life. Abraham was told in chapter twelve of Genesis to leave his home and his family and travel to a place he did not even know yet but which God would show him. Surely Sarah suffered much heartache as she left behind her family and friends. She journeyed away from all that was familiar to her and toward she knew not what. She no doubt had confidence in God and in her husband, but nevertheless, she was called upon to make a choice that would affect the rest of her life. Sarah chose to follow her husband, not just when it was convenient, or to her liking, but even when it called for great personal sacrifice.

We also find that Sarah was obedient to Abraham even when he made choices with which she undoubtedly uncomfortable. Consider the time when Abraham fearing the Egyptians told Sarah to tell them that she was his sister and withhold the fact that she was his wife. She was indeed Abraham’s half sister, but first and foremost she was his wife. Abraham was trying to save his own skin and by doing so, put her in a very difficult situation, to say the least. She was taken into Pharaoh’s house. She was obedient to her husband, seeking his good above her own. Because of her obedience, God was faithful and caused plagues to come upon Pharaoh’s house. This caused the truth to be revealed and Sarah was returned to her husband. By this, we can see that no matter what the circumstances, if we are to follow Sarah’s example and be obedient to God’s order we can be assured of God’s blessings upon us.


We also need to understand that Sarah had great responsibility as Abraham’s wife. He was a man of substance. He had extensive holdings and many servants. Sarah surely had numerous maidservants in her charge. It could not have been an easy task to oversee the workings of her large household. She was a woman who had much responsibility.

She was also a woman who gained the respect of her husband. She followed him into the unknown leaving behind all that she had ever known. She followed him through famine and prosperity, through good times and bad, all the while calling him lord, acknowledging his headship. By doing so, she was rewarded with her husbands respect. When she came to him asking that he put away Hagar and her son, Abraham complied to her wishes even to the putting out of his own son. This shows the high regard he had for Sarah. She earned his respect by her continued devotion and obedience to him and her compliance to the laws of God.

God chose this woman to be the mother of nations. It would be her offspring who would become the great nation of Israel. It was through her son Isaac that the promised one would come. He chose her also to be an example to us. She called her husband lord, master. She acknowledged that his authority was supreme over her. She pleased God.

[justavessel4him]

Submission or Subversion, conclusion

"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law." I Corinthians 14:34

"Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve." I Timothy 2:11-13

Just as the law that God instituted in the very beginning ordained woman to be in submission to the man in the home, it necessitated that she would also be in submission to man in the church. God did not change his mind. He did not suddenly decide that man would be a helpmeet for woman. He build his church on principles that had been in effect from the very beginning. Man would be in submission to his headship and woman would be in submission to man. It would be impossible for the church to function properly any other way. Just as it would be impossible for the moon to orbit the earth if it suddenly deviated from the laws that God established when he created it, the church which is made up of men and women must function according to the law God put in effect when he created human beings. Man first, then woman. God created man to be in the leadership position, and woman to be a helper to man. During the creation process, he did not call upon Eve to make any decisions. God brought all the animals to Adam for him to name. He asked the man to make decisions. Adam was even responsible for naming woman. God gave Adam responsibility for everything in the Garden. And the Lord God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it. Genesis 2:15 It was Adam to whom he gave the first commandment ever given to man, not the woman, and not even the man and woman together. Verses 16 and 17 tell us, "And the Lord God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it." This was before Eve was even created. God gave Adam responsibility for the care of the earth and all he had created upon the earth. He also gave him responsibility for the spiritual well-being of mankind when he gave him instructions concerning the trees he had placed in the Garden. It was Adam who would be held accountable for the keeping or breaking of the commandment not to eat of the tree which was in the midst of the Garden. Although woman would suffer the consequences of her actions, it was man who was held accountable for the breaking of the commandment. Roman’s 5:14 tells us it was Adam’s transgression, "Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come." I Corinthians 15:20-22 says, "But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." Timothy 2:14 clearly tells us that it was Eve’s transgression, but nevertheless, it was Adam who bore the responsibility for bringing about the death sentence to mankind. God gave man all this responsibility and to the woman he only gave two duties. One was to be a helpmeet to the man, and the other was to bear and nurture children. Perhaps if woman had shown herself trustworthy, she would have been given more responsibility, but she didn’t. She sinned and lured her husband into sin, thus giving up her right to be put in a place of leadership. I Timothy 2:11-14 says, "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection."But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." Eve messed up. She broke the first commandment ever given to mankind, and woman would forever suffer the consequences of her actions. She would always be in a place of submission to man. She could never have a place of authority in the kingdom of God.

I have heard it said many times that there is no difference in the way God uses men and women. This thinking cannot be reconciled with the Word of God. When Jesus chose the leadership for his Church. He chose twelve men. When he gave what would become known as the great commission, he sent only men. When the Church at Jerusalem began to grow and deacons became necessary, the Apostles chose seven men full of the Holy Ghost. Later, the Apostles went from city to city they ordained elders to oversee the local assemblies. The qualifications of elders and bishops clearly show that this could have been only men. No where in the record of the New Testament Church, does it ever show where a woman was placed in a position of authority, or where a woman ever preached a sermon. God did not, and he will not go against the laws put in position from the very beginning. It was man in the place of responsibility and woman as his helper then, and it is the same today. God does not change. Society and it’s mores change. What is accepted by humanity changes. What is accepted by God does not. Just because women have been accepted into places of authority within the church by man does not mean that it has all the sudden become acceptable to God. A woman who truly desires to please God and be used of God will not seek to be used in a way that is contrary to the laws of God. She will seek God’s will for her life and her ministry. There are many ministries in which a woman can be used to bless the church, but the preaching of the Word or the leadership of the church are not among them. A woman who is in love with Jesus will be content to stay in the place instituted for her by God from the foundation of the world. Woman’s place is a place of servitude to be sure. Her job is to minister to others. If we really want to be Christ-like, we will gladly accept this role. Mark 10:44-45 says, "And whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be servant of all. For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many." There is a place for everyone in the body of Christ. There is work to be done by all. None of it more important than the other. I Corinthians 12:18 tells us, "But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him." It is God who decides where we will be placed within the church. He will not decide to put a woman in a place of authority over a man, because that is contrary to his Word and he will not do something that is contrary to his word. It is our responsibility as women of God to stay in the place God has ordained for us and do the very best job that we can to carry out whatever duties he calls upon us to do. Yes, woman’s place is the place of a servant. What an honor it is to be a servant in the house of the King of Kings. I pray Lord give us a servant’s heart.

[ThirdGeneration]

Old Preach- Please read my post carefully. I wrote, "The KJV uses the word 'servant' for the Greek word, "diakonos" which appeared 20 times in Paul's letters." Note the phrase "in Paul's letters."

I am not going to address the NASB. It is my understanding that it flows from a different manuscipt than the KJV did. But that is a whole different thread, no?

As you rightly point out, the modern NIV translation continues to use the word, "servant" in this verse. BUT, what you may not have noticed is that they, unlike the KJV were consistent in its application to the Greek word, "diakonos."

All of the verses that I had pointed out in my post above, now use the word "servant[s]" instead of the word "minister[s]." Servant was no longer applicable just to Phoebe; but applied likewise when describing Paul himself, Apollos, Timothy, and Tychicus.

See 1 Cor 3:5; Eph 3:7; Eph 6:21; and (1 Thes 3:2 in some manuscripts) in the NIV.

The definitions IHS provided came from Strong's; a most respected source.

Btw-
I believe that in looking at those individuals that Paul called servants, we can glean why the definition listed by IHS was so defined. Indeed, he that would be great among you, let him serve!

[Sarte]

Can A Woman Preach?

The only way to determine the truth is by examining the Bible and letting it provide the final answer. The Scriptures clearly teach that there is a distinction in the roles God wants men and women to fulfill.

When either men or women fail to fulfill their God-given responsibilities, they are in rebellion against God.

Regardless of what some say, men and women are different in more ways than just the obvious.

1. Mentally -- Men are good with mental three dimensional manipulation, while women are better at doing multiple tasks simultaneously).

2. Verbally -- 100% of women’s oral noise is verbal. Only 60% of man’s is (The toolman had it right; men like to make noise -- grunt, grunt, vroom, vroom).

3. Differences in responsibilities (no time to go into it -- look up the following scriptures.)

a. Responsibilities of men (Ephesians 5:25-33, Ephisians 6:4, Colossians 3:18, I Timothy 5:8).

b. Different responsibilities of women (Genesis 3:16, I Corinthians 11:3, Ephesians 5:22 & 33, Colossians 3:18, Titus 2:4-5, I Peter 3:1-6)

4. There are many other differences.

Please Read 1 Timothy 2:11-15

Some ignore this passage. Others make wild charges that Paul was a male chauvinist, but this same Paul also wrote...

1. I Corinthians 14:37-38 -- "If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant."

2. Galatians 1:11-12 -- "But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ."

3. Paul wrote what God told him to write!

We must not argue with God nor compromise with those who do.

Cannot pick and choose what we want to accept and reject in the Bible. It’s either all truth or corrupt.
As the scripture says, we must let those who are ignorant be ignorant. We cannot force people to accept the truth.

I Timothy 2:11-12 -- "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

1. Some have invented ingenious arguments in their attempts to get around this passage, but we must ask, did God reveal the truth through His apostle or not?

2. Can anyone claim that this passage is not teaching a difference in the roles of men and women and still keep a straight face?

3. I Timothy 2:13-14 -- Paul gave two reasons for women learning in silence and not having authority over men.

a. Reason #1 -- "For Adam was formed first, then Eve."

1. Adam created first and given charge over God’s creation.

2. Eve made as his "help meet."

3. Adam was never to be Eve’s help-meet.

b. Reason #2 -- "Adam was not decieved, but the woman being decieved was in the transgression."


ARGUMENTS EXTENDED BY THOSE WHO SUPPORT THE TEACHING OF MEN BY WOMEN…

A. Argument #1 -- Men and women are equal in the eyes of God.

1. prooftext Galatians 3:28 -- "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

2. The real meaning of Galatians 3:28.

a. Has nothing to do with gender roles as is assumed by many.

1. Paul deals with gender roles many times in his epistles. The Word is clear that Men and women are different.

2. Jews and Greeks never traded nationalities!

3. Slaves were not released, and free people did not become enslaved when they accepted Jesus!

4. If their roles did not change, it is inconsistent to say that the roles of men and women changed.

b. The verse has to do with value in God’s eyes.

1. Jews and Gentiles are of the same value.

2. Slaves and freemen are of the same value.

3. Men and women are of the same value.

4. They are all of one blood and one bride through their faith in Christ.

c. This verse simply cannot be used as evidence that women may teach men.

B. Argument #2 -- Paul’s reason for writing this was cultural, so it does not apply today.

1. It is said that I Timothy 2:12 must be interpreted in light of its culture.

2. It is said that Paul wrote, "I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence" because priestesses of the false goddess, Diana were getting saved and thinking that they could come into the church and have the same role. For this historical reason, it is believed by many that women today can teach men.

3. I do not see how this proves anything. In fact, it would seem to support the position that women are not to teach men. Think about it, why would Paul write this to Timothy if it was all right for a woman to teach men in the church? The incident would seem to ignite the necessity for Paul to address the subject.

4. Look at the context of I Timothy 2:9-15. It has to do with the behavior and worship of women.

5. The cultural interpretation is shot down by the simple fact that Paul appeals to creation and to the fall as his reasoning for saying that he did not allow women to teach -- I Timothy 2:13-14 -- "For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression..."

6. Paul’s reasons go all the way back to the Garden of Eden.

C. Argument #3 -- Joel prophesied that in the last days, women would prophesy.

1. Joel 2:28 -- "And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions:"

2. Women may prophesy -- I Corinthians 11:5 says that a woman may prophesy with her head covered (under authority)! She can have the spiritual gift of prophecy!!

3. To prophesy does not mean "to preach or teach."

D. Argument #4 -- The word "man" is singular both in the Greek and English, so they say that this could not be related to men in general.

1. I Timothy 2:12 -- "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence."

2. "A woman" is singular as well as "the man."

3. The rule must apply both ways.

4. (Singular) A woman, (singular) the man.

E. Argument #5 -- Some women teachers and pastors can do the job better than men.

1. Let me draw a parallel. Fornication can be more fun than marital sex. It feels better to slap someone back rather than turn the other cheek.

2. I do not dispute the ability of women. I just obey God.

F. Argument #6 -- God has used women preachers so they must be called!

1. God has proven time and again that He can use even the evil of man for a good end!

2. I’m not saying that women teachers are evil. I do not judge their hearts, but God is clear regarding the woman’s role in the church.

G. Argument #7 -- "Usurp" means "to take by force."

1. Usurp can also mean "to possess" or "to wield."

2. Since the word can be defined in this way, this argument cannot be used.

H. Argument #8 -- Some women have the gift of teaching.

1. Yes. Women may teach women and children, but women are not to teach or have authority over men.

2. This does not mean that a woman cannot work behind the scenes and help her husband in his teachings.

a. Certainly, if a woman knows something that will help her husband, she can share it with him.

b. For example, a woman’s knowledge could aid her preacher husband.

c. Women also are charged with teaching their children -- I Timothy 2:15 -- "Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety."

1. Knowing that salvation is only in Christ, in the context of I Timothy 2, the "salvation" spoken of in this verse has to do with a woman’s teaching ability.

2. Her teaching ability is to be used in raising kids (which explains the necessity of faith, charity, holiness, and sobriety).

The roles that God gave for all of us are plain and simple. -- "I suffer not a woman to teach nor to usurp authority over the man" is plain and simple teaching written by a man who spoke what God told him to speak.

The question is whether we are willing to submit to God’s will or are we going to insist on living the way we want to in spite of what the Bible teaches.

Can a woman share the Gospel? Yes!

Yet there are women preachers & teachers today who claim to even be called by God to be pastors. How can this be that a woman is called to be a pastor when women are commanded in scripture to be under authority?

Forgive me for being harsh, but the apostle John wrote I John 4:1 that the way we test the spirits is to compare what they say to the Word of God.

1. If what they teach or practice is contrary to the Word of God, we can know without a doubt that they are false.

2. When we read the words of the Holy Ghost teaching us that women are neither to teach nor to have authority over a man in the church (for this is the context), and then we hear women claiming to be called to preach by the Spirit, what conclusion must then be drawn?

3. Putting this is gracefully as I possibly can, to say that God allows something that he does not is to prophesy falsely.

4. Again, I want to state that I love my brothers and sisters in the Lord, but I cannot compromise the scripture.

[ThirdGeneration]

Sarte- Welcome to the Cafe.

I currently have my hands full responding to IHS; but in time I will get to your post. You can count on that.

In the mean time, can you address why God used Deborah in the OT to lead all of Isreal, but now in the NT women covered by the blood of Jesus and filled with His Spirit no longer qualify for leadership?

Btw- I don't believe anyone here is arguing that God did away with the sociolocal roles in which we relate to each other; but rather that there are no gender specific roles in the body of Christ that would limit men or women to particular gifts or ministries.

(See the 12th chapter of Romans, 12th chapter of I Corinthians, and 4th chapter of Ephesians with a Greek dictionary in hand).

[Sarte]

Thank you, and as for Deborah

It would seem that many of women preachers and their male advocates hold to their position knowing full-well that it is contrary to scripture. Often, when confronted, they will simply say that they know what the Bible says but that the passages in question are not for our dispensation. Or, the woman preacher herself, will appeal to her own experience claiming that it was God who has called them (as though God would do anything contrary to His Word?), often they are just indignant. But occasionally, you come across someone who will attempt to make a biblical case for women preachers. When they do, it seems that without fail they appeal to the judgeship of Deborah Judges 4.

There are many that do not know how to counter this argument! Once, when confronted with this subject. The conclusion is so simple. The first thing discovered was that Deborah lived at the time when "every man did that which was right in his own eyes" Judges 17:6 In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes. Judges 21:25 In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes.


We read that God raised up Othniel as a Judge. Judges 3:9 And when the children of Israel cried unto the LORD, the LORD raised up a deliverer to the children of Israel, who delivered them, even Othniel the son of Kenaz, Caleb's younger brother.

God raised up Gideon: Judges 6:12-And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him, and said unto him, The LORD is with thee, thou mighty man of valour. 13 And Gideon said unto him, Oh my Lord, if the LORD be with us, why then is all this befallen us? and where be all his miracles which our fathers told us of, saying, Did not the LORD bring us up from Egypt? but now the LORD hath forsaken us, and delivered us into the hands of the Midianites. 14 And the LORD looked upon him, and said, Go in this thy might, and thou shalt save Israel from the hand of the Midianites: have not I sent thee?

God raised up Samson Judges 13:24 And the woman bare a son, and called his name Samson: and the child grew, and the LORD blessed him. 25 And the Spirit of the LORD began to move him at times in the camp of Dan between Zorah and Eshtaol.

But with Deborah, we learn as much from what the Bible does not say as in what it does say. Regarding Deborah we read: "she judged Israel at that time" Judges 4:4 And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time. Again at a time when "every man did that which was right in his own eyes" Deborah, without being raised up by God, judged Israel. Deborah was not a God called judge.

Her great accomplishment was to conquer Sisera. Yet we read in Hebrews 11 that it was Barak's faith that wrought this victory. Hebrews 11: 32 And what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets: 33 Who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions. In Judges 4:8 we read that Barak was a coward who would only go if Deborah went with him. Judges 4:8 and Barak said unto her, If thou wilt go with me, then I will go: but if thou wilt not go with me, then I will not go. Deborah appears to be the one with the faith. But God gives Barak the credit in His "hall of fame." Hebrews 11: 32 And what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets: 33 Who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions.

[tufluv]

Wow! Sarte, Welcome, pretty good arguments, I must say, I'm impressed, but of course, the Bible is what speaks loudest in so many issues, all glory goes to GOD, alone. I'm just perusing this particular thread, as time allows, and I'm also impressed in the time both sides expend on this issue, very informative. Amazing how people can argue their points so passionately! I'm just glad let the HOLYGHOST show me what is and isn't truth, and it makes for a simpler, more peaceful spiritual journey., Halleluyah! AND, gives me more time to spend with the lost souls in need of spiritual nourishment and fellowship.
I do spend quite a bit of time here, yes, but NOT ALL!
PRAISE BE TO JESUS! ;)

[ThirdGeneration]

Sarte- I like the fresh argument even though it is quickly quashed.

We do not have to speculate rather God raised Deborah up or not. We do not have to wonder if she assumed power of her own accord. The Scripture plainly tells us that God was in control.

The second chapter of Judges provides a summarized version of what the rest of the book is going to tell us about; the story of the judges of Isreal that is sandwiched between Joshua and the Isrealites having a king.

15 Wherever they went out, the hand of the Lord was against them for calamity, as the Lord had said, and as the Lord had sworn to them. And they were greatly distressed. 16 Nevertheless, THE LORD RAISED UP JUDGES who delivered them out of the hand of those who plundered them. 17 Yet they would not listen to their judges, but they played the harlot with other gods, and bowed down to them. They turned quickly from the way in which their fathers walked, in obeying the commandments of the Lord; they did not do so.

Note the next verse in particular:

18 And when the Lord raised up judges for them, THE LORD WAS WITH THE JUDGE and delivered them out of the hand of their enemies all the days of the judge; for the Lord was moved to pity by their groaning because of those who oppressed them and harassed them.

Deborah is a major issue for those that would interpret Paul's instructions in Timothy as being against women teaching, preaching or being in leadership. I do not believe that one interprets instructions in the NT correctly if it flies in the face of an example from the OT without any comment either in the OT or NT.

This is especially true in light of other examples and passages from the NT that suggest equality in ministry.

[In His Service]

Deborah,
Did she lead? Or did she tell the leader to go ahead and lead? Was she counted as a person of faith in the NT?

I will take time later today to address this and other points.

Welcome Sarte, very good points that where skimmed over but we will delve into them further.

Bro. Silva,
Good points. I see third pick out the definition that she seems to think fits best. I will address that later also.

After writing on the easter thread all morning I need to do things around the home for the family here.

PRayers for all,
Bro. Timothy

[In His Service]

I went back on something I had spoken of before while discussing this topic and will copy it below.

Deborah was a judge, the equivalent of a modern day judge. A civil service job if you will. A public servant. She was not in any way part of the ministry or priesthood. She never used her position as judge in the tabernacle, but we see that she set out under a tree for that matter.
Let’s look at what she told Barak, and you will see that she was not prophesying, but merely making a statement, 6. And she sent and called Barak the son of Abinoam out of Kedeshnaphtali, and said unto him, Hath not the Lord God of Israel commanded, saying, Go and draw toward mount Tabor, and take with thee ten thousand men of the children of Naphtali and of the children of Zebulun?
When we read the next chapter we can see how that Deborah prophesied, the same way that Mariam did, she sang a song, a poetic song unto the Lord. In that song she calls herself a Mother to Israel. She says that she, 12. Awake, awake, Deborah: awake, awake, utter a song: arise, Barak, and lead thy captivity captive, thou son of Abinoam. She identifies herself as a mother and as a singer. Nothing more. We also can see that in Hebrews that she is not listed with Barak as one of the heroes of faith.
Also during the forty or so years that Deborah judged we see that Israel descended into a backsliding state. We find no indication that she spoke to the nation anything to stop or rebuke them for doing this. We see also from the Word that she held no spiritual position over the people at any time during her time as judge.

Was a judge then part of the Ministry? Was she a priest?

Bro. timothy

[justavessel4him]

Hi ThirdGeneration,
And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time.
5. And she dwelt under the palm tree of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in mount Ephraim: and the children of Israel came up to her for judgment.

Notice two things about the above Scripture. It lists Deborah as the wife of Lapidoth, clearly showing that she was under the authority of a husband. Also, it says that the children of Israel came to her. They came to her where she dwelt, to her home where the authority of her husband reigned.
I also wanted to point out that the verses from the second chapter of judges do not prove that God ordained Deborah as a judge, just that he ordained judges. Some judges, not all judges. Sarte pointed out many whom God did ordain, but Deborah doesn't seem to be one of them.

[stmatthew]

Very interesting posting going on here. Yet if i know Third, the big guns are getting ready to sound!!!!!! hehehe!!!! I'll just stand at the sidelines and see who is left standing at the end of this one.

LET THE GAMES BEGIN!!!!!!!!!!!!! :D

[witness4jesus]

Tim, this is one area where we agree.

Women have a lot to say and do in the church,
but being behind the pulpit is not one of them.

The denominational world and modern society
are what motivate women preachers, not the
word of God. There has to be some stretching
in order to come up with a woman preacher
anywhere in the Word. They change Junia
to a man, and try to Phoebe a minister. Its
just not there, particularly with Paul's admonitions
on women.

The truth is, nowhere in the word, either in the OT
priesthood, in the ministry of Jesus, in the early
workings of the church is a woman given a position
to preach the Gospel. Paul said to commit the word
on to faithful men.

Also, if we look at the purpose of a woman, as wife
and mother, in relationship to the church, this becomes
clearer.

sis pam

[ThirdGeneration]

Ya'all I am busy right now baking cookies and cleaning toilets; but my husband says I can post tonight.... ;)

Stmatt- I can't believe you have to wonder! :goof:

Witness- Are women allowed to take Communion? You will not find anything that says they did or could....

[stmatthew]

Sis Pam,


I guess it all comes down to the fact that some do not see, or like, the biblical role God established for woman.


oopsss............. back to the sidelines before Third squishes me !!!:) hehehe

[Blessed]

Sarte,
In your posting you posted: "Or, the woman preacher herself, will appeal to her own experience claiming that it was God who has called them (as though God would do anything contrary to His Word?)"

It reminded me of something my very wise mother has always said referring to some preachers (men of course)!

-Some are called
-Some are choosen
-Some just get up and go!

I've seen a few in my day, that claim that God has called them. I don't think one can stick that claim just to women!!!LOL

[justavessel4him]

Bro. Burdette,
The Word of God is the big guns. Someone fighting against the Word can't win, and that is exactly what Third is doing. Frankly, I haven't seen anything new in her posts. She uses the same old arguements as do most who contend for women in preaching or leadership positions. Besides, it is not a fight against Third. It is a battle for truth. Jesus said, "Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away." Mark 13:31 The truth will prevail. The Lord does not change, nor does his Word because of societies ideas or influences. The Women's Liberation Movement and the spirit associated with it have influenced many such as Third into thinking that God has changed his thinking with the times, but he has not. He created man first and he created woman to be a helper for man. Eve sinned and God put woman in a role of submission to man because of her disobedience. Nothing has changed since then. Woman is still subject to man. Salvation doesn't change that. The New Testament is clear that the man is still head over the woman. A woman who cannot be in submission to her husband or the men God has placed over her in the church cannot be in submission to God. To be in submission to God is to be in submission to his Word and he said, " Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve." You can see here how Paul speaking by the authority and inspiration of the Holy Ghost reached all the way back to the beginning to show that this is ordained of God.

[witness4jesus]

Third, since Communion is actually a fulfillment
of the Passover feast, which FAMILIES took
part in, I would say the Bible does speak to
that. Women took part in the supper of
Lamb as much as men did.

And we all have access through the Spirit to
the Father. That is not the issue. The issue
is that the woman reflects the church as the
bride, and the purpose of the church is as
bride, is as mother.

When women preach, men are put in the
sidelines. Women are not meant to
overshadow the man, but vice versa.

Yes, there were some phenomenal
women involved in the Pentecostal
movement. But the ultimate judge
has to be the word of God.

sis pam

[Xerf]

Women, HA! How short some memories are! TURN BACK the pages and ...................>

After the fall in Garden of Eden, Adam was walking with his sons Cain and Abel.

They passed by the ruins of the Garden of Eden. One of the boys asked, "What's that?" Adam replied, "Boys, that's where your mother ate us out of house and home."

<..............................

NOW what daya say?

:)

[Nawbee]

Boy, some on here should learn that up means up and down means down.

When it says that a woman was a deacon, she was just that: A deacon in the church.

When it says they are bishops, they are bishops.

When Jesus sent the women at the tomb, His first use of Apostles, BTW, did those women instruct men of anything important?

Did the prophetesses mentioned all over in the New Testament only prophesy to women and children?

There is no reason to believe so.

Women weren't supposed to exercise more authority than their, now listen, Y'all:

HUSBANDS!!!

IF their husband thinks it's OK for them to preach, they can preach, because there is no male or female: IN CHRIST!

Who thinks that means that males become females?

It means that God Gifts them without concern for maleness or femaleness. It means that He will Reveal things without regard to maleness or femaleness.

With one Exception: The marriage.

If the woman isn't married to you and she is doing so with her husband's OK, then listen away.

For the guy who only heard one woman preacher and she was a bad one, I ask: How many fish do you find in a desert?

Meaning that if you and those who run your churches don't allow any women preachers, then why would you expect to hear a good one?

I can show you some that can preach up a storm!

Whther it would be anything you'd accept, I haven't a clue, but I know it has been from God.

I'll take His Word over yours.

;)

So, why would God have a group of women go at His Direct Instruction to instruct the eleven Apostles if women weren't to instruct men?

Did the Apostles learn anything when they heard what the women said?

Well, no. Appearantly those men were like some here. They didn't care what Jesus had Told the women, they knew women couldn't be saying anything a MAN could learn anything from, huh?

:D

[tufluv]

:laugh: :laugh: Cute, XERF!

[In His Service]

Nawbee,
Read the Word of God, the Angels instructed the women to tell the disciples. To deliver a message to the Apostles.

Might you show me where it speaks of a women being a Bishop, or a deacon for that matter? What about them being the husband of one wife. Funny that when one wants to make a women a deacon that the Word of God doesn't speak of a women deacon's husband role they need to follow, LOL LOL!!! How come so many look over that portion of scripture? Convenience?

What prophetesses are you speaking of in the New Testament. I see where there where women that prophesied but where are they called prophetesses?

It would seem to that you are overlooking 1 Cor. 14:34. Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
35. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

This is not speaking of in the home but in the church? How do you deny this?

These are just a few things in an apparent haste that you overlook to support your postition and or teaching. Why leave any of the Word of God out. Are we to take away to make our ideas seem right?

Bro. Timothy

[Xerf]

Yes, amen, and WHY do you supose that church was ordained to be a place of PEACE.........A haven of rest.........a refreshing...........a time of blessing?

"Let your women keep silence in the churches"

That's one big reason why!


:)

[justavessel4him]

Hello Hawbee,
You made some statements in your post above that I would like to comment on. I will copy and paste your words and then my comments.
"When it says that a woman was a deacon, she was just that: A deacon in the church." I agree, but the problem is that no place in the Bible does it say that a woman was a deacon. Phebe was not a deacon. The Greek word servant means just that. Someone who is an aid or helper. Phebe had a ministry of service.

"When it says they are bishops, they are bishops." You must be reading a different Bible than I am. Nowhere does it say that a woman was ever a Bishop. The qualifications for a bishop clearly say that he is to be the husband of one wife, and the qualifications for his wife are also given. This clearly shows that a Bishop is a man.

"When Jesus sent the women at the tomb, His first use of Apostles, BTW, did those women instruct men of anything important?" First use of Apostles???? Are you saying Mary was an Apostle??? To answer your question, no, those women did not instruct the men in anything. They just had a wonderful testimony. One I hope we all can share. They had seen the Lord. He was alive and real in their lives. This is quite different from instructing, and it certainly was not preaching or being in a place of authority. They were witnesses.

"Did the prophetesses mentioned all over in the New Testament only prophesy to women and children?" No, but prophesying is not preaching, and not one of the prophetesses mentioned in the Old Testament went out to prophecy. People came to them. Some mentioned as prophetesses never even prophesied at all. Some were prophets wives and some merely were poets and singers such as Miriam.

"IF their husband thinks it's OK for them to preach, they can preach, because there is no male or female: IN CHRIST!" Tell me then, if there is no difference in male and female in Christ, why did Paul give instruction for women to have long hair and men to have short hair? Why are women to, as you yourself said, to be in subjection to their husbands?

"If the woman isn't married to you and she is doing so with her husband's OK, then listen away." Could you give me chapter and verse for this please? Did Paul say "Women keep silent unless your husband says it is okay for you to speak? Did he say I suffer a woman not to teach unless her husband says it is okay???

"I can show you some that can preach up a storm!" There are many women even in secular circles who are excellent speakers, but that does not mean that they have the anointing of God, or that they are pleasing to God in what they are doing.

I am sure there is much a man can learn from a woman, but that does not mean that God ordained women to be preachers or leaders in the church. I really don't understand why women can't be content in the place God has ordained for them. There are many valuable ministries for women in the Church. Why do so many want a place of leadership over men? Human nature maybe. The spirit of the women's liberation movement maybe?

[In His Service]

Very well spoken Vessel!!!!

Hard to find fault and prove that wrong,
Bro. Timothy

[Nawbee]

That's the whole point: God hasn't Ordained the place you and others claim.

;)

The point is why do they need to restrict themselves and subject the Gifting of God to the whims of the counsels of men?

:D

The bible I read that says women were deacons and bishops and pastors and prophetesses is the one written by the Apostles and other disciples in the first century AD.

Or are you one of those folks who thinks that if the KJV was good enough for the Apostles Paul and Peter, it should be good enough for everybody?

;)

You didn't address the point that an Apostle is one who is sent by the Resurrected Jesus to a specific group of people with a specific Message. Mary Magdalen and other women were then the first Apostles.

Then they went and spoke the Words of God verbatum, did they not, making them prophetesses, right?

They traveled to their given audience to deliver the Message, right? That adds evangelists to the list.

Once there, they fed the Word to the men and taugh (you can teach those who still do not learn) to them and instructed them in the New Way Of God in Jesus Christ, the women being the believers and the men being the unbelievers, making the women pastor/teachers, right?

By my count this would be the Model for the "four fold ministry" (not five as some wrongly proffer) of the Apostle (not pastor)....

So I ask, did Jesus sin then in sending the women?

[Nawbee]

Add to this that Jesus is "The Second Adam" and as a woman brought the temptation unto death to mankind so then women took the Invitation unto Life to mankind...

;)

A Restoration in Truth, literally and figuratively.

[In His Service]

Nawbee,
Might I encourage you to give chapter and verse in some of your responses. Please show me in the NT where a women was a pastor, bishop, etc....

Strong's Number: 652 apostolo
Original Word Word Origin
apostolo from (649)
Transliterated Word Phonetic Spelling
Apostolos ap-os'-tol-os
Parts of Speech TDNT
/b] Noun Masculine [/b] 1:407,67
Definition
a delegate, messenger, one sent forth with orders
specifically applied to the twelve apostles of Christ
in a broader sense applied to other eminent Christian teachers
of Barnabas
of Timothy and Silvanus.

Since Apostle is a masculine noun how could it apply to a women?

Maybe Nawbee you are younger in the Lord. IF so I encourage you to study to show yourself approved before all men. When we present an idea to the world or in the church we need to make sure we have all bases covered. To lead one astray with ideas that can not be totally bible backes is dangerous.

Prayers your way,
Bro. Timothy

Ps Check the noun usage for evangelist too. It is also masculine.

[Nawbee]

I'm very well seasoned by many trials by fire and Fire.

If you knew anything about Greek you'd know that feminine verbs and nouns were applied to masculine objects and vice versa with unfettered license.

If you had studied a bit more yourself, you would have known that.

As for the verses that document my claims, what more do I need than these:

Matthew 28:5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. 6 He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.

7 And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you.

8 And they departed quickly from the sepulcher with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word.

9 And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshiped him. 10 Then said Jesus unto them, Be not afraid: go tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me.

Mark 16:8 And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulcher; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid.

9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.

10 And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept. 11 And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not.

Backs every word posted above.

Seems someone who was studied up should know that as well.

I'm not "about" one upping anyone, sir. To that end, and by the Lord's Leave, I take another of my by now, common hyatuses and will return if and when the Lord Commands.

This time I depart with this Word:

Matthew 10:23 But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.

24 The disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his lord. 25 It is enough for the disciple that he be as his master, and the servant as his lord. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them of his household?

26 Fear them not therefore: for there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known. 27 What I tell you in darkness, that speak ye in light: and what ye hear in the ear, that preach ye upon the housetops.

28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

29 Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father. 30 But the very hairs of your head are all numbered. 31 Fear ye not therefore, ye are of more value than many sparrows.

32 Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.

33 But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.

As some have said even on this list, if what I say is of God, it will Prevail. If it is not then it must fail.

For those who know and Trust the One True Living God, and live by EVERY WORD THAT COMES (today?) FROM HIS MOUTH, nothing to worry about, right?

;)

[Oldpreach]

By Nawbee :

"The bible I read that says women were deacons and bishops and pastors and prophetesses is the one written by the Apostles and other disciples in the first century AD."

"Mary Magdalen and other women were then the first Apostles."

Bro. Tim , may i suggest that you refrain from talking to Nawbee any more. Before you came , he proved himself to be a total false teacher...denying fundemental truths such as the catching away of the church. I listed the above to show you just the tip of the iceberg. He really needs help and guidance at this point...even if i cant spell it !

[In His Service]

Dear Newbee,
I agree that with objects that the gender can be directed differently. I am not aware of that happening with persons. I will see what I can find on that and if wrong will state so here.

What did the women do, Did the Angels instruct them to go and tell them that Jesus was risen? Or did they carry a message on where they where to go? What doctrine where the women taking to the Apostles? Wonder why we don't find a these women listed in scriptures after that as Apostles?

I do see that you did not show scriptures that would back the ideas that women where bishops, elders, deacons, evangelist from the Word of God. I get used to that when people have ideas that are not supported by the Word of God. Silence and leaving is common when one can not support thier ideas.

Nawbee, Nothing in my post to you where meant to offend. My desire is that all might search the Whole Word of God and always support any teaching with all of the Word and not only parts. I can take a scripture out of the Word of God and build any doctrine on it by itself. To have a doctrine that must balance with the whole Council of God is what we are to believe in.

I pray that if you are taking time from the board here that you might prayerfully consider what has been presented by myself and others. We don't do it for any personal glory, but for the glory of the Lord and for the Word of the ministry.

Prayers your way,
Bro. Timothy

[In His Service]

Bro. Silva,
I was trying to get him to answer the very questions you copied? Why does anyone make statements and not back them by the Word of God on such fundementals as this?

Smiles,
Bro. Timothy

[Oldpreach]

He seems to me to be quite full of himself really.

[justavessel4him]

Newbee,
Sorry about misspelling your name before.
The Scriptures you quoted above don't prove anything except that Jesus told the women to go and tell the disciples that he was alive and they would see him in Galilee. Doesn't prove a thing you said. I am still waiting for chapter and verse stating that women can be deacons, bishops, preachers. or Apostles. Of course, it is much easier to claim indignation and leave than to try to find scripture that does not exist to prove a point that the Bible does not substantiate. By the way, there is nothing new coming today from his mouth. He will not speak something to you or anyone else that is not according to the written Word.

[justavessel4him]

Nawbee,
Looks like I got your name wrong again. Sorry. At least I got the rest right. :0)

[Nawbee]

Oldpreacher:
Bro. Tim , may i suggest that you refrain from talking to Nawbee any more. Before you came , he proved himself to be a total false teacher...denying fundemental truths such as the catching away of the church.

Me:
Totally untrue.

I believe in and teach the Rapture of the church.

I'm outta here!

:beammeup:

[searching]

It would seem to that you are overlooking 1 Cor. 14:34. Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
35. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.


Bro. Tim, please don't tell you that your wife and three daughters don't talk in church (yeah, I know one of them is a newborn, but do you stick a bottle in her mouth if she starts to cry....LOL.....J/K). Do you honestly believe this passage is literal for this day and age? Do you believe that all females should be silent and not allowed to speak nor pray in church (as in prayer, it means they would have to speak to God)? What do you believe this passage is really saying, and does it apply to us now?

Me...

[ThirdGeneration]

Originally posted by In His Service
Deborah was a judge, the equivalent of a modern day judge. A civil service job if you will. A public servant. She was not in any way part of the ministry or priesthood.
Was the position of Judge; spiritual leadership? -----------------------

Absolutely! The Scripture makes it clear that the priest AND JUDGE were to hear matters together and that God would speak through them. To not hearken unto their judgment meant that such a person would die (Deutoronomy 17:8-12).

It is also interesting to note that the Scripture includes this statement--> According to the sentence of the law which they shall TEACH YOU (Dt 17:11).

Finally, we know that when the children of Israel wanted a king instead of a judge to rule over them, God told Samuel that they were not rejecting Samuel, but rather God. He said, "for they have rejected me that I should not reign over them" (1 Sam 8:7).

In other words, God used the office of judge to reign over Israel, but the children of Israel wanted a king instead.

Based on this verse and the work with the priests; I find it unreasonable to believe that the judge served in a secular or civil service type position instead of as an open and obvious, visible conduit of God.


Was Deborah a prophetess? ---------------------------------------------

Absolutely. The Scripture directly tells us so. "And Deborah, a PROPHETESS...." (Judges 4:4).

Deborah did not just sing victory songs as IHS seems to have suggested. We note that she told Barak that Sisera (the captain of Jabin's army) was going to fall at the hand of a woman (Judges 4:9).

It also appears that she told him exactly when to begin the battle. "And Deborah said unto Barak, Up: for this is the day in which the Lord hath delivered Sisera into thine hand.... So Barak went down from mount Tabor, and ten thousand men after him" (Judges 4:14).


What of the fact that she was not mentioned in Hebrews, but Barak was?---------------------------------------

Not being listed in Hebrews 11; takes nothing away from the facts as they were recorded in Judges. Perhaps Barak is mentioned in the hall of faith because he trusted that God could speak through a woman!

Alternatively, the men listed in Hebrews 11:32 (Gedeon, Barak, Samson and Jepthae, and David) were victorious warriars. Samuel, although not a warriar per se, had killed King Agag (the king of he Amalekites) with his own hands (1 Samuel 15:33).


Did the people turn their backs on God when Deborah was in charge?-------------------------------------------

I think not for two reasons. We are told that during the time Deborah was judge the land had rest 40 years (Judges 5:31).

Peace for Israel meant that the people were honoring God and keeping God's Commandments.

In the 28th chapter of Deutoronomy, God promised the children of Israel that as long as they followed His commandments and turned to Him, He would "set them high above the nations of the earth." He also told them that if they turned their backs on Him, they would be smitten by other nations (Dt 28:25,27,48-57).

The Scripture in the second chapter of Judges summarizes such a cycle of:

1. Israel forsaking God;

2. God letting them fall into the hands of enemy nations;

3. The Israelites calling out to God;

4. God raising up a judge (Judges 2:16);

5. The Lord delivers them out of the hand of their enemy ALL THE DAYS OF THE JUDGE; (Judges 2:18)

6. But when the Judge WAS DEAD (Judges 2:19), they once again began following other gods and the cycle started all over.

There is nothing written about Deborah's time as judge to suggest anything different occurred.

We should note that the Scripture never mentions Deborah as a fluke. The Scripture never tells us that using Deborah in a leadership role was against the divine order of God but had to be done because....

Instead, Deborah as a leader, is noted in history without explanation. How then can we say that God doesn't approve of women as leaders with a straight face?

Alternatively, are we to believe that blood bought, Spirit filled women are more restricted than women in the OT? I think not.

[ThirdGeneration]

Originally posted by justavessel4him
And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time. 5. And she dwelt under the palm tree of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in mount Ephraim: and the children of Israel came up to her for judgment.

Notice two things about the above Scripture. It lists Deborah as the wife of Lapidoth, clearly showing that she was under the authority of a husband. Also, it says that the children of Israel came to her. They came to her where she dwelt, to her home where the authority of her husband reigned.

I also wanted to point out that the passage from the second chapter of judges do not prove that God ordained Deborah as a judge, just that he ordained judges. Some judges, not all judges. Sarte pointed out many whom God did ordain, but Deborah doesn't seem to be one of them.

JV4H- What is your position here? I was not aware that you thought women could lead in any circumstance.....

Regardless, I believe Deborah's husband is immaterial to God's work in her life. He is listed as her husband just as all the other men in the Bible's wives are listed. There is no other mention of him.

The Scripture says nothing about her husband's authority or that she was even at home as suggested.

It appears to me that there were about 13 judges during the time between Joshua and Saul as king. Of those 13 judges, I found that six of them were listed without specifically identifying that God was the impetus behind them.

However, the fact that Deborah had prophesied that a woman was going to have her hand in the battle and that prediction came true actually shows that she was not on her own, but rather speaking for God.

The Scripture itself clearly called her a prophetess.

Furthermore, the second chapter of Judges does not in any way indicate that it is applicable only to SOME of the judges. It says that God raised up the judges that led the nation to victory. We have no concrete reason to believe that the second chapter of Judges was not applicable to Deborah's time as judge.

[Blessed]

If women are literally suppose to be silent at church, however, do they pray, sing unto the Lord, and for that matter teach Sunday School? :eek:

[ThirdGeneration]

To all- I am not posting again on this thread until at least Monday. I spend too many hours researching any one point. I need the break! :D

[In His Service]

Third,
I just glanced again at this thread and saw you where not posting on this thread till monday. Sorry I misunderstood you.

Bro. Timothy

[Hnovilla]

His Name is Jesus!

What does the word 'usurp' mean? Is it found anywhere in these posts?

Brother Villa

[In His Service]

Hoping third will have time soon to begin the discussion again.
Bro. Timothy

[ddc101]

Cor. 14:34. Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law

Reconsider the interpretation of the above scripture.Read it all again not missing anything.Are we under the law?

[In His Service]

ddc,
Read the "As also" notice it is in addition to what Paul is instructing. He is not saying be under the Law, but do as I instruct even as did the Law instruct us. He is showing us that God did not change his mind on the leadership of his chosen people.

We have other scriptures that speak on the same issue and make the point that it is in the church and in regards
to teaching the assembly of believers that they are speaking.

So many speak of what Paul was addressing is the yelling from one side of the church service to the other by the women. Funny that there is no biblical mentioning of this idea that people lean on. Plainly speaking Paul is telling them of the leadership of the church. Women where wanting to lead but God instructed him to admonish them that this was not God's ordained order.

Prayers your way,
Bro. timothy

[Oldpreach]

IHS: "So many speak of what Paul was addressing is the yelling from one side of the church service to the other by the women. Funny that there is no biblical mentioning of this idea that people lean on"

Who needs anything to lean on Bro. Chamberlin? This is one thing that i always noticed about the Charismatics...(and having come thru that to the truth , i can say a bit about that group) they are great at explaining away scripture with extra-Biblical additions such as what you mentioned above. For years now i have been heartbroken by Apostolics starting to do this in a BIG way. The above statement from ddc is a perfect example of it. A total departure of context , then in comes the presumption and spectulation. The Charismatics to the same thing when it comes to Oneness , Holiness , Baptism and ect. We must ask ourselves the question: In who's camp do we reside? " But ye have not so learned christ...." Any Brother or Sister that follows not the traditions that Paul and the other Apostles laid out in WORD and EPISTLE are simply put , in error , and subject to deception. Lets pray.

[ThirdGeneration]

Well IHS and Oldpreacher- How are you going to explain away Deborah?

Do you really believe that the NT is more restrictive of blood-bought, Spirit filled women than the OT? Did women take a step backwards when Christ redeemed them?

Do you believe you interpret a couple of verses correctly in relation to the NT in its entireity? Do you interpret those verses correctly in relation to the gender neutral (Greek dictionary in hand) 12th chapters of Romans, 12th chapter of 1 Corinthians and the 4th chapter of Ephesians?

[In His Service]

3rd,
Again why do you see it as restrictive to follow God's ordained order? If you are married to you see your submission to your husband as restrictive?

I have no need to explain away Deborah, I merely read the Word of God and see what it says. Was she a leader of the Temple? Is she named as a Priest? No you say? Then why would you use her to justify women leading in the house of God?

I will take time tomorrow to answer more in depth. How do you use your gender neutral dictionary to explain away that a Bishop, elder, or deacon had qualifications for his wife also if he was to serve. Does that dictionary give a new twist to the word "wife" and say that a wife can mean a husband, "~) Wonder why the Apostle didn't list that a husband of a female Bishop. elder, deacon had to fit into some qualifications before she could serve? The answer, because Paul had stated that it was a God ordained postion for a man and if married his "WIFE" had to fit qualifications also and not the other way around for gender neurtal train of thought.

Sleep well,
Bro. Timothy

[ThirdGeneration]

In His Service- Can a widower or single man be a bishop? Must he have children?

I know of no churches that take this verse literally except to note that it cannot apply to women. Why is that?

Why would we read this literally for part and not for part?

Would you agree that the Ten Commandments were applicable to both male and females? Do you realize that one of the commandments was not to covet thy neighbor's wife?

Was the point of the passage about gender and being married to a wife or was it about stability and reputation?

What of the fact that Paul, Timothy, and Titus would be precluded from serving in such capacity when we read this literally? Should we trust a literal interpretation that would produce such a bizzare result? I think not.

[searching]

IHS, I asked a question a little ways back, and never received an answer. If you don't want to address it, that's fine, just say so. Or perhaps you didn't see it at all, so here it is again.

It would seem to that you are overlooking 1 Cor. 14:34. Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
35. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.


Bro. Tim, please don't tell you that your wife and three daughters don't talk in church (yeah, I know one of them is a newborn, but do you stick a bottle in her mouth if she starts to cry....LOL.....J/K). Do you honestly believe this passage is literal for this day and age? Do you believe that all females should be silent and not allowed to speak nor pray in church (as in prayer, it means they would have to speak to God)? What do you believe this passage is really saying, and does it apply to us now?

Me...

[Oldpreach]

What is the context of the passage that contains "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
35. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. " ???

Therein you will find the answer. And , it is quite sad that so many ministers are so afraid that they seemingly leave this alone. In this thread , this sad truth is really showing....such a lack of good , drawn out teaching among us that someone seriously asks the question "Do you believe that all females should be silent and not allowed to speak nor pray in church (as in prayer, it means they would have to speak to God)? "

Lord , please help your people....

[ThirdGeneration]

IHS-

1. Please address my specific post about Deborah where I used Scripture that showed that the judge and priests rendered judgment together.

2. Please address the fact that God told Samuel the Isrealites were directly rejecting Him when they desired a king instead of God raising up and using judges to lead.

3. Please revisit the priesthood arguments you made.

I brought up the fact that God told Isreal that He would make them a kingdom of priests (Ex 19:6) and that was fufilled because we are all now a royal priesthood (1 Peter 2:9).

You countered by saying that Ex 19:6 was talking about the Levites.

The Scripture does not talk about Levites in this chapter, but instead Moses is talking to ALL the people and Peter verified that it was true of the NT belivers.

And although Peter said it (not me) you went on to say that we don't need priests anymore in the NT because of the blood of Jesus.

You are only half right and that is why Peter said what he did. While it is true that we no longer need a priest to make atonement for us, it is also true that we have all been given the ministy of recociliation.

18 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation.

19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation (2 Cor 6:18-19).

4. Please re-visit Job's daughters.

You pointed out to the example of Job's daughters getting an inheritance as meaning nothing more than our inheritance at the end of the race, but this is hardly likely since women were never less "saved' then men in the OT, even though there was a different protocol for each gender in their relationship with God.

Women were less involved in religous symbolism in the OT. Men were circumcized and only men were priests.

However, in the NT, God poured out His Spirit on all; He circumcized the heart of all believers; and we all became a royal priesthood (once again male and female).

Clearly, women were no longer going to be the chattel of the men, but rather individual people in their own right. If this were not so, God would have no need to fill women with the Holy Ghost.

The fact that our membership in the body of Christ is genderless has absolutly nothing to do with our roles among ourselves as husband and wife; parent and child or bond or freeman. I do not believe anyone has argued otherwise.

5. You continue to speak of the exclusivity of the five fold ministry; but I have yet to see you produce any Scripture that says that it belongs exclusively to males. I am waiting with great anticipation.....

[ddc101]

In the light of this scripture:

Rom 6:14
14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

Please interpret the following focusing on the word LAW
What did Paul mean by this?Were the women still under the law?


1 Cor 14:34
34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
(KJV)

[ddc101]

Here is another consideration:
:21 In the law it is written, With [men of] other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
This is a passage that this appears in just a few verses up.
Paul was explaining tongues in the light of the Old Testament prophecy.But in no part of the old testament do I see where women were commanded to be silent.They were however commanded to obey their own husbands in this verse:

Gen 3:16
16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
(KJV)

God gave Adam the autority to rule over Eve.
But this is part of the curse.
Women however are also released from this curse in Jesus Christ.
Think of what Paul taught here.

Gal 3:13
13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
(KJV)

Surely the Apostle Paul did not contradict himself.
It was not the silence that was being dealt with as under the law but it was the obedience and Gods order in marriage for men and women.lv sis.c

[justavessel4him]

Sis Searching,
In response to your post above to Bro. Tim i want to say that it is important to rightly divide the scripture in order to get the right understanding. In the verses you quoted above Paul said for the women to keep silent for it was not permitted for them to speak. We can go to I Timothy2:11-12 to get a better understanding of these verses. It says, " Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence." These verses shed light on the verses in I corinthians. They show that it is in the teaching part of the service that a woman is to keep silent. In Titus 2:3-5 we find that the older women are to teach the younger women. So we know that women can teach other women. The verses in Corinthians and Timothy show that a woman cannot teach or have a place of authority over the men. If we study here a little there a little and add line upon line and precept upon precept we can gain the right understanding.

[In His Service]

ddc,
You have had children right? Might I be so blunt to ask did it hurt?
If it hurt even the slightest then we can see that what was spoken of in Genesis as to being still in affect today. Do you also need to be in subjection to your husband? Is your husband your head? If you answer yes to these questions then you have made your arguement null and void.

The entire NT speaks of the need for the women to be in subjection to her husband. If one wanted to really argue that what was spoken of in Genesis that you have used would have to throw out a great deal of NT text to have it be in line with those kinds of thoughts.

Lets take all that is said and not try to disprove a thought but strongly with the whole Word prove our thoughts.

Prayers your way,
Bro. Timothy

[In His Service]

3rd,
I am to watch my 3 1/2 and 22 month old this morning while my wife goes to take care of a WIC appointment. I most likely will be later before I can respond to your questions.

Searching,
I do think that Sis. Martha answered your question well. Do you deny what Timothy was taught by Paul? If you would like to discuss this line of thought further please just let me know. Also I ask that you go back to 3rds post and if you will show what you feel had no backing in my answers to her.

Thanks all,
Bro. Timothy

[In His Service]

ps ddc,
Many of us have a great need to study to know exactly what was the "Law" that was being spoken of in the New Testament. Many have a broad range of things they want it to cover that it does not.

That would be a whole seperate thread itself.

Could you clarify what you where saying here, Surely the Apostle Paul did not contradict himself.
It was not the silence that was being dealt with as under the law but it was the obedience and Gods order in marriage for men and women. You spoke that it was not the silence that was being dealt with but the obedience in marriage. Could you go further into what you find from the Word of God that lead you to believe it was just one and not both?

Thanks
Bro. Timothy

[justavessel4him]

Hello Third,
I have been reading back over some of your post. Let's look at some clear facts.
Deborah was not in the priesthood.
There was never a woman in the priesthood.
You say she prophecied. Women prophesy today. It is a gift of the Spirit. That does not make them preachers.
There is no indication whatsoever that Deborah ever left her home or the umbrella of her husband's authority to do her judging. The Bible says she dwelt under a tree and the people came to her.
In the case of Huldah, it is the same. The scripture lists her as the wife of Shallum and indicates that people came to her. There is nowhere that it records either her or Deborah going to or standing before the people to prophesy.
God created Adam first, then he created Eve for the exclusive purpose of being a helpmeet for the man.
Eve sinned. She disobeyed God and from that moment on woman would be in subjection to man.
God did not deviate from his divine order in the New Testament.
He did not call any women Apostles.
The Apostles never ordained any women Elders.
There are no qualifications given for women Elders, Bishops, or Deacons. Only for their wives.
There is no record of any woman ever preaching a sermon.
There is no record of a woman ever presiding over a congregation.
There is no record of a woman ever being in any kind of leadership position in the New Testament.
Paul gave us instructions as to how women should conduct themselves in the worship service and that was that they should not teach nor usurp authority over the man.
Of course, we all have a ministry of reconcilliation. We are all called to be witnesses. We know women can witnesses because we have the example of Priscilla. We know women can have helps ministries, because we have the example of Phebe and other women who were a help to the Apostles and the early Church. None of these women held a position of leadership, or ever preached a sermon, yet they were valuable assets to the church just as women are today.

[ThirdGeneration]

IHS and JV4H - You say there were no women in leadership in the NT. That is debatable; but no less likely than women taking communion which cannot be proven either.

But even if we could not find examples of women in leadership back then ..... what would that prove in a day and age where women were considered property, poorly educated and lacked much of the basic fundamental religous training of their brethren?

Please find the Scripture that shows that God ever intended us to have church buildings or pulpits. Please show me that cars and air conditioning are acceptable. Please show me that preachers that shave are not prohibited since we can find none in Scripture.

Alternatively, please show Scripture that says that the five fold ministry is exclusively male.....

Btw- I am working against a deadline today. I don't know if I will be back tonight or tommorrow. But, Lord willing, I will be back!

[Xerf]

This gal (Nancy) can do more with what's NOT in the Bible than most folk can do with what's IN it!!

:rolleyes:

[In His Service]

3rd,
Had time to quickly read the board and saw your post. Want to comment quickly.

you said,
IHS and JV4H - You say there were no women in leadership in the NT. That is debatable; but no less likely than women taking communion which cannot be proven either.

But even if we could not find examples of women in leadership back then ..... what would that prove in a day and age where women were considered property, poorly educated and lacked much of the basic fundamental religous training of their brethren?
I have heard this arguement before. Might I ask you where you get your information that says that the women where only looked at as property? (That is a muslim idea, BTW) that they where poorly educated and that they lacked the basic fundamental religious training? When I took time to study about this during a previous discussion I found that your statements could not be proven true with History? I then would look forward to your sources of information.

Please find the Scripture that shows that God ever intended us to have church buildings or pulpits. Please show me that cars and air conditioning are acceptable. Please show me that preachers that shave are not prohibited since we can find none in Scripture. . What does any of these things above have to do with how God set up the church? It seems that many grasp at straws and try to uncover things that are not directly spoken of to side track the discussion of things that are clearly stated in the Word. We see no idication in the Word of God that would prohibit cars, for example, but we have scriptures that prohibit women from being in the leadership of the church. It is like apples and oranges.


Alternatively, please show Scripture that says that the five fold ministry is exclusively male..... A study of Bishop, Elder, and deacon shows this clearly. You have stated that by using a greek dictionary it will show these terms as gender neutral. However we know that the translators of the KJV could read in the text just as easily as we can, what would have given even a gender neutral word its masculine or feminine usage. When speaking of a bishop, notice that he was to rule his house well. A women would not rule her house. That easily would show it a masculine usage. But to then go on further and have it spoken of a Bishop that might have a wife shows the masculine usage even further. I am sure that if it was to just be a "Spouse" gender neutral that a different word would have been used, don't you.

more a little later today,
Bro. Timothy

[In His Service]

3rd,
I was wondering if you might give us your thoughts on some of the scriptures that you have spoken of that are gender neutral when you viewed the words in a greek dictionary. Could you give us some examples where you have found that a masculine usage is not masculine?

Thanks I would appreciate it. I have been doing some further study and look forward to your thoughts.
It will too most likely be later this evening before I can post further.

Bro. Timothy

[searching]

Searching,
I do think that Sis. Martha answered your question well. Do you deny what Timothy was taught by Paul? If you would like to discuss this line of thought further please just let me know. Also I ask that you go back to 3rds post and if you will show what you feel had no backing in my answers to her.


Actually, I was just trying to be funny. You seemed to be posting those scriptures and I believed that you had your women follow them, thus the reason for my question.

I believe that God can use women to speak to men, even to be an authority to them. In this day and age, there are less and less men with backbone enough to take PROPER authority. If God can't find a man to do it, a woman will work just as well.

I would like you to comment on what I say below, and quote from the Bible.

1 Cor. 12:7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. 8 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; 9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; 10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues: 11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.

First of all, if you want to take this verse literally, only men can have these gifts, as there is no mention of women at all. If you say that women are included, you cannot dispense them where YOU see fit to place them in the passage above. Either women can be all those workers, or none of them.

You also ask Third if she can find a masculine term used for women, or something to that affect. The Bible uses the word "man" or "him" several times in the Bible, but not being exclusively referring to men or males. The above passage is one of those times.

You also say that women being property is a Muslim belief. I believe you are mistaken there. Even in the Bible days, women were property that were bought. I know Muslim people, and I don't believe they deem their wives as property. However, many of them believe as you do, that women serve no other purpose than to bear children and remain silent. :D

I also looked up "apostles, evangelists, prophets, teachers, and pastors" and all those words are masculine words, yet you claim it's ok for women to prophesy and teach. Women were also judges, yet we also know that "judge" is a masculine term.

The Bible may not have had women partaking of certain offices, but neither did they have women that worked outside of the home. However, in this day and age, not only do women have to work, but we also have to work on Sundays!!! Things change from culture to culture and time to time. We are all one in the body of Christ, and I don't believe that God cares whether or not one is male or female who desires to participate in this wonderful truth.

Me...

[Just Me]

"Please find the Scripture that shows that God ever intended us to have church buildings or pulpits. Please show me that cars and air conditioning are acceptable. Please show me that preachers that shave are not prohibited since we can find none in Scripture. . What does any of these things above have to do with how God set up the church? "

I'll interject a thought here. If I correctly recall, God didn't specifically instruct the building of all the separate synagogues where people went to worship (I believe this was something the Pharisees established). However, when Jesus ministered on the earth, he never spoke against them, but rather went and taught in these meeting places. So just because modern church articles are not mentioned in the Bible does not in and of itself make them wrong. On the other hand, if there had been specific instructions about setting up a meeting place and what we do is contrary to that, then that's a different story.

[In His Service]

Searching,
I just set down to eat a bite and checked the boards.

A couple of quick answers to your thoughts.

Your comments on in this day and age there are no men with back bone to stand up and speak, has no backing and truthfully is a fabrication of those that can't find in the Word of God backing for the belief that God ordains women to lead the church. That is not said to offend you, so please don't be offended. IF we want to speak of proper authority, where do we look to get that authority? The Word of God. Where do we see God speaking of a Women taking the authority to lead the church? IT is not there.

As to what you spoke of in 1 Cor. 12:7 as to the usage of "Man" there if we read with understanding we see clearly that it is speaking of mankind. If we search the hebrew or greek we see also that it speaks of mankind in that usage. Here in lies the key to understanding God's Word in a deeper way. We read all of what is being said on a subject, then see where else the same subject is being discussed. They will speak both the same things. We don't pick out only a single word and build a teaching.

I would encourage you to study what is being said above and see that this is not talking of God's ordained and placed leadership in the church. It is speaking of the Spiritual gifts that God will give to "MANKIND" when they obey his Word. We have to rightly divide the Word of Truth and see what is being said. There is nothing here that is speaking of the "Leadership" of the church- the five fold ministry.

I will leave the discussion with 3rd about the greek usage until later. I encourage you to read all that is discussed.

If you could, would you find in the OT where those that where obeying God looked at their wives as property like, say cattle? Where was a wife bought? As to the muslim, a devout muslim looks upon the wife as second class, something that can be disposed of at will. I would venture to say that your friends are not deep muslims. As to your untruth about my believing that women are only bear children and remain silent, "~), you are so very mistaken. I have stated before and will again that women are very important part of the work of God. They can do much to be a blessing to the Work of God. A Godly women will follow the Word of God and not a feminist teaching with no backing!! :~)

As to women prophesying or teaching and not being part of the five fold ministry. Dig a little deeper sister. Did Paul tell the older women to "Teach" the younger women? Is that leading the church or doing a great work for God? A great work. I or you can, if God chooses, bring forth a prophesy from time to time and that does not make us a prophet. A prophet was God's used soley to speak to the Body of believers. Learning to seperate the Word of God from our ideas is central to undertanding HIS Word.

As to your last comments as to not having women partaking in certain offices, (which by the way from this you seem to see they did not) but now having to work outside the home is a whole seperate issue that is not dealing with this subject. Things might change from Culture to Culture and time to time but the Word of God remains the same through all those changes and still speaks the same thing as it did 2000 years ago or so.

And you are correct God does not care whether we be male or female to partake of the promises that come when we obey his gospel. All can have the Holy Ghost and hope of eternal life if they obey his Word.

Bro. Timothy

[ddc101]

Bro.Timothy,
I did not post in the light that you are referring to.Go back and read my post.It is not one with attitude.I was referring to the headship of men in marriage.I was not however saying that all men are in authority over all women.And I think I did use enough bible and did rightly divide it.By the way when is the last time a women had to suffer in "These United States" in childbirth.We have enough drugs in the OB now that birth can be as pain free as we want it to be.Be real Brother!!!!
Evidently you and I are on different pages in life.lv sis.c

[searching]

Bro. Tim, where you and others seem to differ is that you look at certain things that the Bible teaches about, but pays no attention to that which the Bible remains silent on. For instance, the Bible, according to you, says that only men can lead women. However, the Bible says nothing about it being wrong for women to lead men. In the days that the Bible was written, it was unheard of for a woman to speak her mind. For Paul to mention that a woman would be a pastor would have brought gasps to the audience. However, Paul didn't mention the separation of men and women in the passage I quoted above, yet they are all masculine nouns. Can a woman be a teacher? Sure, but teacher is a masculine noun, and according to you, if it's masculine, then it's meant for a man to do.

You also need to get to know some Muslims personally. You can learn a lot by speaking to the source instead of obtaining supposition.

My point of bringing up women working outside the home is that in the Bible days, it was unheard of for a woman to work for pay. That was a man's job and responsibility. A woman couldn't find work unless it was in the fields, and the pay really stunk!

As for women being sold, oh goodness, most of the men in the OT bought their wives. Do you really want me to quote a source?
Jacob worked for 14 years free to have the wife he wanted. Isaac and Abraham bought Rebekah. Do we continue this practice today? Not me. I'm not really sure my husband would have paid much for me anyway....LOL.

I may not be back until this evening, but I'll be back tonight.

Me...

[In His Service]

Sister DDC,
Come on sister get real about the issue of Child birth!!!! My wife just had a baby and ended up having a block. Guess what, even with that block where she should not have felt a bit of pain she was in tears for the meds didn't take it all away.

Funny though that the pain still was there only masked. God didn't take the pain away did he? We are only covering it up with meds. So you would then have to say that man is taking the curse away and not God!!!!! How long has the spinal been around? Seems that for 1900 years that women still had to suffer. Did the curse of pain during childbirth then by your ideas go away with the spinal or at the cross? See sister your positition does not make sense in this area in the least.

I did not speak to you as to any attitude in your post. It was merely that you wanted to make us believe that the pain of childbirth went away for women at the cross.

I still would ask you to clarify what your where saying in the highlighted text from the last post.
Thanks
Bro. Timothy

[In His Service]

Searching,
I too guess you need to realize that there are different levels of the muslim faith. Some very slack in thier ideas, other more strongly following the older muslim teachings. We have only to look at the society of the country we last invaded to see how that section of muslim society thought of thier women. Open your views to more than just those you know and see the whole picture of the entire religion.

Did Jacob look at his wife as just a possesion, like livestock he would own? There is not a single scripture that I am aware of that will show that line of thought.

Also go back and read the part of my post concerning the women being a teacher. The five fold ministry it to the church as a whole. That usage would be masculine.

And remember a virtous women sold her wares that she made to obtain money. Did she work outside of the home the way that women do today, not usually but she could do much to help the family. Research it through the Word and through history and see. While taking care of her family everyday she still could help the family as a whole. But like I said a whole different thread that we might could discuss later.

So sorry that your husband might not gave given much for you, :~) I would have given much to gain my wife!!

Bro. Timothy

[ThirdGeneration]

IHS- Just took a break for dinner and I still have a ton of work to do, but I wanted to point something out before you tried to run too far with it....

It seems to me that you are implying that whatever teaching gifts women have been given, are for the benefit of teaching the younger women to be good wives at home (Titus 2:4).

As if this were enough use of their gifting....

However, what you may not have realized is that the word, "teach" in this verse is actually a word in Greek that is used no where else in the NT.

It is unrelated to all the other times Paul uses the word "teach" and "teaching."

The "teach" in Titus 2:4 has more to do with correcting or disciplining rather than conveying new thoughts and ideas. See Strong's definition #4994.

restore one to his senses
to moderate, control, curb, disciple
to hold one to his duty
to admonish, to exhort earnestly


I look forward to your responses from the post I did at 3:33am today. (I sure keep strange hours some times)!

I certainly intend to answer your post about my view of Greek neutrality in the Scripture as it pertains to the ministry.

Got to run....

[ddc101]

Timothy
I believe that childbirth is no way as severe as it was for women of old.In fact many of them died in childbirth.That is not so today.
Are you saying that God only uses supernatural means? Then why even bathe since water is natural.Herbs are natural and many drugs are herb derived.No I think it is because we don't see scripturally eye to eye.lv sis.c

[In His Service]

Sister C.,
So do you or not believe that what was spoken of in Genesis as to women suffering in childbirth still happens in our day and age or not? Regardless of the severity does it still hurt for women to have a baby?

If you say that women still hurt then you would have to leave behind the ideas that the cross made negative what was spoken of in Genesis.

I do look forward to more discussions with all. It is so important that the church is in one mind and one accord on these basic biblical principles.

prayers your way,
Bro. Timothy

[bishop1]

Give me a scripture to show why a woman could go to a doctor for child birth

[Adoniyah]

xerf, you said:

This gal (Nancy) can do more with what's NOT in the Bible than most folk can do with what's IN it!!

My question:

So, who's Nancy?

That gal, Thirdgeneration does an excellent job of whipping us all with one hand tied behind her back.

Why did we send the 3rd Infatry Div. along with the Marines and the Air Force to Iraq. We could have just sent her. When Bagdad Bob saw her coming, he would have said, "Boys, its all over, we surrender.":cry:

[ddc101]

Oh yeah Bishop,
I guess you would rather we die in the woods in pain like women used to along time ago.Please...give me a break..sis.c

[ddc101]

Bro.Tim,
I believe the cross totally removed all the curse off of those who have gone the true plan of salvation.What you are talking about is the flesh which has yet to be redeemed.That is very different
than trying to say that all women are under the authority of all men.The reason I gave the example about childbirth is because no way do women suffer like the women of old did.Find another angle if you care to argue.Show me scripture.lv sis.c

[Adoniyah]

Bishop:

You are NOT saying what it sounds like???

[Webmaster]

I certainly hope I misread that, also Adoniyah. My wife has a cousin (notice I did not say it was MY cousin), who is a pastor here in Indiana. As I understand it, they do not believe in doctors at all. I have a real hard time understanding that.

[Xerf]

Adoniyah, Nancy (aka ThirdGeneration). I call her "Nancy" because of her sleuthing ability as in "Nancy Drew."
As for whipping us all with one hand tied behind her back, well, speak fer yerself, I for one, refuse to concede to a one-armed woman that would have put TWO nails in Sisera's head or would have not stopped at cutting Sampson's locks but would have pulled him bald! NO SIREE BOB--NOT ME!!

:rolleyes:

[In His Service]

Sister C.,
I don't want to argue with you sister. It seems that maybe you are saying something different than I am reading from your post.

When I am reading your post I am seeing that you are saying that the cross brought women out form having to submit to their husbands in the natural. I do not see the following as a curse. It is the outcome for thier disobedience and what all mankind then would live by. Genesis 3: 16. Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
17. And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;
18. Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;
19. In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

A women is still has sorrow in her childbirth as she is still subject to the headship of her husband. A man still must work by the sweat of his brow. Thorns and weeds are still the toil for mankind.

There is nothing to show from the Word of God that this lot for mankind changed because of the Cross, but much to show that the man still had to be the leader of the home, and that the women was to be in subjection to her husband. It is not a bad thing now, nor was it then.

I have never stated and do not believe that all women are under the authority of all men. In the marriage the man is the head of the women, as God spoke. My next door neighbor is not the head of my wife. Each man is the head of his wife, as God ordained. This does not make them slave masters over thier wives but spiritual leaders and heads of thier homes.

As to the women suffering during childbirth. My wife had our first daughter at home. The next two she had completely natural with no medication of any kind. I can assure you that she was in just as much pain as any women of old while giving birth. If you don't believe me just ask her, LOL LOL!!! She will tell you in a heart beat that it HURT!!!!

Prayers your way,
Bro. Timothy

[In His Service]

Bro. Strange,
Guess we don't see the same on this one, and maybe 3rd will improve with her defense soon, LOL LOL!!!!!

Bro. Timothy

[Bro.Steingass]

Eph 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

We are to Love our wives as CHRIST loves us....unconditionally, with mercy and grace, and compassion. That means with RESPECT too. All too often Apostolic men believe that we are overlords, slavemasters, and physical commanders over our wives. That is our own lack of Honor and decency, our own selfishness is brought to the surface. Then we try to justify our own immaturity with scripture, saying "she's rebelling against my God-commissioned command"

The respect MUST be mutual.

any "APOSTOLIC" or other man who puts himself above his wife, and neglects to give her the best possible treatment available, I have no respect for. Abuse by a man of his wife cannot be tolerated.

[In His Service]

Sis. C.,
This came to me and I wanted to share it with you.

9. In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
10. But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
11. Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13. For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
15. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

Notice that what Paul spoke of here is the same as in Genesis. What a women would endure in Childbirth then still was the same after the cross.

Prayers your way,
Bro. Timothy

[Sandy]

So then Bro. Timothy, I assume you really believe that verse is actually speaking of physical childbirth that a woman is saved in? :yeah:

[ThirdGeneration]

Adoniyah!! Let her [Truth] and Falsehood grapple; whoever knew truth put to worse in a free and open encounter?
-John Milton

Xerf- I beseech you in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken. -Oliver Cromwell, letter to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, 3 Aug 1650 :angel:

IHS- Not she with trait'rous kiss her Savior stung,
Not she denied him with unholy tongue;
She, while apostles shrank, could danger brave,
Last at his Cross and earliest at his grave.
-Eaton S. Barrett

[ThirdGeneration]

IHS- I will post later today about gender neutrality in Scripture as it relates to the ministry.

In the meantime, I am hoping that you respond to my post 2 days ago at 3:33 am....... :sb:

[Xerf]

Nancy here are a couple more of Cromwellisms:


"THE PEOPLE WOULD BE JUST AS NOISY IF THEY WERE GOING TO SEE ME HANGED."
Cromwell referring to a cheering crowd.1654


"NO ONE RISES SO HIGH AS HE WHO KNOWS NOT WHITHER HE IS GOING."
Cromwell on personal fortunes.


:rolleyes:

[ddc101]

Bro.Tim,
I don't believe you have received the spirit of which I posted in on this thread from the start.You are trying to convince the wrong person of submission Brother.My husband is my pastor.I have double the submission factor.But to be honest I submit to Jesus Christ first and foremost.What things come to you are not all of the Lord some are of the fleshly attempt to strive.Please refrain from that.Just stick to the word of God.
Women are not saved in pain in childbearing.lv sis.c

[justavessel4him]

Sandy,
That word "saved" in the verse Bro. Tim quoted above does not mean saved in a spiritual sense. Bro. Tim has never implied that it does. It means to save, deliver or protect. heal preserve, do well be whole. God will keep his hand on a godly woman, protect her during childbirth even though Eve sinned and brought pain and sorrow into childbirth. That is what the verse is referring to. What he was trying to point out is that nothing has changed this side of the cross concerning woman's punishment and her being in subjection to her husband. God created woman to be a helpmeet to man and she was placed in subjection to the man because of her disobedience. When God set up the New Testament church those ancient laws were still in force, just as they still are today. Paul was showing us in the verses Bro. Tim That because Adam was formed first and then Eve, and because woman sinned women would not be permitted to teach or be in leadership (usurp authority over men) in the church. But nevertheless he would protect the Christian woman in childbirth.

[ddc101]

Sister Martha that is your opinion of the scriptures.What you just typed out was a teaching.Men read this and some of them learn from it.sis.c

[In His Service]

Sister C.,
The scripture above is plainly written to show that a women will be saved in childbirth if they,'if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety'. . Why are some trying to make the scriptures mean something differnent than they are plainly written as?

I am not trying to convince you of the point of submission. I do not question you in the area of submission to your husband. This thread is about women leading in the house of God. You have stated that you believe that women can hold the 5 fold ministry and that what was spoken of in Genesis 3 is no longer in affect. I am not striving against you but for you sister. Genesis 3 has not changed in our relationships. Some who feel that women can be the leaders of the church here have argued such.

I do have to ask why sister that when you share on areas such as the holidays with others and state things even strongly that you do not consider it striving against those you post to. When I might post to you on an issue that we differ on then I am striving against you? Are we not hoping to help our brothers and sisters see more of God's Word?

Two remember that when we rebuke and elder let us do it as the Word says.
Bro. Timothy

[In His Service]

Dear 3rd,
Forgive me for not yet finishing the post to you. I have not been at my best physically the last two days. We have had cold and wet weather which adversely affects my physical condition greatly.

I am working on it and will post it when I can,
Bro. Timothy

[Blessed]

In reading over the post, I have to wonder.....I'm not the Bible scholar that many of you are....But I do wonder if "pain and sorrow in childbirth", actually means physical. I as a women can honestly tell you that after going through two natural childbirths that there was pain, not unbearable however, but I sure don't remember any sorrow. It was truly pain of joy! Which makes me wonder if perhaps the pain and sorrow was seeing the sin, the heartbreak, the illnesses that our children go through. After all what parents see their children go through in their lives can be very painful and sorrowful. It doesn't seem to me that God would only speak of men working to till the land as their curse because I really don't know of too many men that now go out and till the land with the sweat of their brow. And in Adam and Eves day was tending the household duties any less physically exhausting than the men job of tilling the land? This thread has really brought up some questions in my mind. Just wondering:confused:

[ddc101]

Bro.Timothy,
And do you suppose that what you share with your correction of me is going to cause me to discontinue to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ? Almost twenty years ago in a prayer closet he called me to do just that.I have never had to force my way into any pulpit or teaching.God has opened the avenues he desired for me.No I do not agree with you concerning this and I do not need convincing.I see biblically where God did use women in leadership roles.But it seems that every time one of the sisters or brothers give examples of such you shut them down because it seems you are defending a position.So in light of keeping peace I will refrain from this particular thread.Lv sis.cooper

[ThirdGeneration]

IHS- I would like to make a couple of points about Genesis 3:16.

1. It was not a commandment! It was actually a description of the NEW reality the couple faced when they found themselves outside the garden.

a. Compare to 1 Samuel 8:11-17 when God told the children of Isreal what would happen when they had a king. Note that it is the reality of life outside God's perfect plan; but in no way was God commanding the king to do the things that he said the king would do.

And so it was a reality that women faced in a world where "might made right." As the physically weaker gender they would be at the mercy of others. However, once they were regarded as property; they then were considered the protected property of the man who would defend them as he would his other property.

b. If the items God spoke of in Genesis were commandments, then we would have no right to circumvent these things in any fashion.

Thus, men would still be tilling the ground and could not use pesticides and things that killed thorns and thistles.

Women could not do anything to make having a baby more comfortable.

In fact, the "church" in the middle ages took the position that women in childbirth should not use the natural anesthetics (such as opiates and henbane which had been around from antiquity) that thwart the divine will of God.

Many lost their lives over the issue. For instance, in Scotland in 1591, Eufame MacLayne was tried and found guilty of trying to hire a midwife to provide her with "a certain medicine for relief of pain in childbirth contrary to Divine law." Her twin babies were taken form her and she was burned to death! (Bernard Seeman, "Man Against Pain" 1962, p96).

2. Even if one wished to see it as a commandment despite the inconsistency of finding grace to circumvent the other points mentioned; the verse speaks of the relationship between a husband and wife; not between ALL men and women.


JV4H- I do not know exactly what the childbirth verse is speaking of in the NT, although one may speculate; but I am sure that it does not promise that Godly women will never die in childbirth. I do not find that to be a reasonable interpretation in light of history at all.

[Xerf]

Nancy, Ahh.......a fitting Cromwellism to insert right here:

"What is all our histories, but God showing himself, shaking and trampling on everything that he has not planted. "


:rolleyes:

[In His Service]

Sister C.,
I will respect that you do not want to discuss this issue with me further and try to refrain from posting to you on this thread.

I do not know how long you have been in the truth sister. I don't doubt that 20 years ago something happened to you. I do though know that God will not go against his Word and call a Women to the five fold ministry. Many people misunderstand God's leadings and lean to what they felt God was saying and do not further seek God as to what his direction is exactly.

Sister I have not shut down when anyone tries to show a women in leadership within the church. The Word of God does that shutting down for it is not to be found. I didn't write the book, I just read it and see what it says. Maybe you feel you see women in a leadership role, in the five fold ministry from the Word. I would have hoped you would have shared more of what you base your believe on as far as this issue is concerned.

Many try to pull something out of the Word to justify thier own ideas or the teachings of others. It all must completely balance from front to back. If a hole is in the explanation then it is not line by line and precept upon precept. All doctrines must be rock solid with no possibility of a loop hole.

The only position that I am defending is the Word of God. Though you feel that you will not post on this thread I hope that you will still take the time to read all that is said,

Prayers your way
Bro. Timothy

[In His Service]

3rd,
Here is a part of the things you wanted me to comment on. I will try and post the other later if I am able to finish, ok.
__________________________________________________ __

Was the position of Judge; spiritual leadership? -----------------------

Absolutely! The Scripture makes it clear that the priest AND JUDGE were to hear matters together and that God would speak through them. To not hearken unto their judgment meant that such a person would die (Deutoronomy 17:8-12). Why do you think that it speaks of the judges sitting in the gates of the city? If the judges where a religious judge why not set in the temple area? The judges would judge civil matters in the city gate because that was the place where most civil business was conducted. The priest would be the ones that judged religious cases directly. We should understand too that there is a difference shown from those that where the judges of matters between the people and the Judges that where over the military. These judges where sent to deliver the People of Isreal from those that would oppress them or come against them to overtake them.

It is also interesting to note that the Scripture includes this statement--> According to the sentence of the law which they shall TEACH YOU (Dt 17:11).

Finally, we know that when the children of Israel wanted a king instead of a judge to rule over them, God told Samuel that they were not rejecting Samuel, but rather God. He said, "for they have rejected me that I should not reign over them" (1 Sam 8:7).

In other words, God used the office of judge to reign over Israel, but the children of Israel wanted a king instead.

Based on this verse and the work with the priests; I find it unreasonable to believe that the judge served in a secular or civil service type position instead of as an open and obvious, visible conduit of God. If you look at what you have said without a leaning bias you might also see that the Judges and Priest where different offices and would judge matters seperately until something came up that needed a deeper judgement. Then they came together and the accused had judgement rendered by both priest and judge. They then had no recourse agains that judgement.


Was Deborah a prophetess? ---------------------------------------------

Absolutely. The Scripture directly tells us so. "And Deborah, a PROPHETESS...." (Judges 4:4). What does the Word speak of concerning a prophetess. When we take time to understand that in Hebrew when looking for the meaning of a word that you go back to the first recorded example of how it is used to understand its meaning. We see that Miriam was a prophetess that gave forth in song. To think that the next usage would mean differently would be to corrupt the usage. Miriam did not give forth a prophecy and then become labeled a prophetess but when she sang songs of victory she was given that name.

Deborah did not just sing victory songs as IHS seems to have suggested. We note that she told Barak that Sisera (the captain of Jabin's army) was going to fall at the hand of a woman (Judges 4:9). The question one should ask is that is a word of knowledge because Barak did not just go out to battle by himself grounds to think that Deborah was looked upon as a Prophet for Isreal? We have no biblical backing to show she was looked upon in that office, none.

It also appears that she told him exactly when to begin the battle. "And Deborah said unto Barak, Up: for this is the day in which the Lord hath delivered Sisera into thine hand.... So Barak went down from mount Tabor, and ten thousand men after him" (Judges 4:14). You really are stretching it here to believe that Deborah was prophecing here about when to begin the battle. I do notice that you left out the part that many use to say she prophecied to Barak earlier. You know that she only told him what had been foretold, correct? Still she did not hold the office of any priesthood and could not have led the people spiritually. That is the whole essence of what we are speaking of. The spiritual leadership of God's people.
We can see in Judges 5: 12. Awake, awake, Deborah: awake, awake, utter a song: arise, Barak, and lead thy captivity captive, thou son of Abinoam. What does Deborah speak of as her part in the battle. She ws to utter a song and Barak was to lead the army. Interesting that Deborah did not speak of a prophecying of any matter here isn't it? She spoke of her job of songs of praise to God, being a prophetess just like Miriam did when victory came.


What of the fact that she was not mentioned in Hebrews, but Barak was?---------------------------------------

Not being listed in Hebrews 11; takes nothing away from the facts as they were recorded in Judges. Perhaps Barak is mentioned in the hall of faith because he trusted that God could speak through a woman! LOL LOL you are really reaching for things here too, :~). Could you give me chapter and verse for your thoughts. Seems those record here where known for victories, where they not? Why did not Deborah become counted as the one that obtained the victory? She was not leading God's Army.

Alternatively, the men listed in Hebrews 11:32 (Gedeon, Barak, Samson and Jepthae, and David) were victorious warriars. Samuel, although not a warriar per se, had killed King Agag (the king of he Amalekites) with his own hands (1 Samuel 15:33).


I would ask that you show how Deborah was ever shown to be a leader of God's People. Did she lead their army? No, she just went with Barak. Was she a priest to take care of the Spiritual laws that God commanded? No! No place was she shown as leading the people.

[Sarte]

Some are asserting that Paul's limitations upon women were given in view of the Graeco-Judaistic culture of his day, but are not binding in our twentieth century where such cultural elements are lacking. There are three New Testament contexts where the apostle discusses the distinctive roles of men and women in the church. They are 1 Corinthians 11:2-16; 1 Corinthians 14:33b-38; 1 Timothy 2:11-15. A summary of these passages reveals that Paul's inspired reasons for feminine subjection were based upon: (a) the creation--1 Corinthians 11:7-9; 14:34b; 1 Timothy 2:13; and, (b) woman's deception by Satan--I Timothy 2:14. "Culture" is just not involved here. In Ephesians 5:22-23, where he discusses the levels of authority within the home, Paul appeals to Jehovah's constitution of Adam and Eve (Gen.2:24) as the basis for his instruction. In fact, it is clearly evident that the graduation of authority within the home and within the church is grounded upon the same facts of sacred history. Accordingly, if women can demand a place of equal leadership with men in the church, by the same reasoning no wife today is bound to be in subjection to her husband. Though some women would delight in this conclusion, those who fear God (and there are many) will continue to serve the Creator with honor and dignity accordingly to their assigned roles.

Some argue that Paul's admonition that women be in subjection is limited by the expression, "as also saith the law" (I Cor. 14:34), and since the law allowed women prophets (as in the case of Miriam, Huldah, and Anna), and even a prophetess judge, Deborah; so, preaching executives are permissible in the church today. A careful study of the foregoing cases will reveal the following facts:

(1) When Miriam prophesied it was "all the women" that went out after her (Ex 15:20), and there is no evidence that she publicly preached to men.

(2) Though Huldah was a prophetess, the solitary record of her prophesying involved some men going to here where they communed privately. (2 Kings 22:14f; 2 Chron. 34:22f.) It is impossible to find public preaching here.

(3) Anna was a prophetess "who departed not from the temple." (luke 2:36-38.) In describing the temple, the historian Josephus says "there was a partition built for the women" that separated them from the men; this was "the proper place wherein they were to worship." If Anna instructed men, it was doubtless in private situations. There is no proof that she publicly prophesied to mixed audiences.

(4) Deborah was a prophetess of the hill country of Ephraim, but there is no indication that she publicly proclaimed God's message to the multitudes; rather, "the children of Israel came to her for judgement." (Judges 4:5.) She gave prophetic judgement as a "mother in Israel." (Judges 5:7.) The fact that she judged at all is a dramatic commentary on sickening weakness of the Israelites during this period, and Deborah's song (Judges 5) laments this woeful condition. This was but one of those occasions where Jehovah accommodated his working to Israel's weaknesses. (I Sam.8:9; Matt.19:18).

In Philippians 4:2,3, Paul comments that two women "labored" with him in the gospel; he calls them, along with others, his "fellow-workers." Again, the assumption is made that the "fellow workers" necessitates an authoritarian position comparable to the apostle's. However, Christians are said to be "God's fellow-workers." (I Cor.3:0.) Obviously this does not suggest that we are authorized to act as deity! Countless godly ladies have assisted, labored with, and been fellow-workers with gospel ministers without ever having become public preachers themselves.

[ddc101]

In light of Bro.Atkinsons rule about this:
On other matters of doctrine, feel free to post your views supported with scripture. It is okay to disagree, just let the conversation flow, letting go of the need to prove yourself right. Remember, the truth needs no defense, so let go of your fleshy pride and ego. Use your anonymity to humble yourself and learn. There is no injury in this, only benefit. We can all learn from each other. If the issue is an important one and all involved are truly seeking truth, then prayerful discussion and study of God's word will reveal it.
I feel it necessary for me to discontinue posting in this thread.
God did not call me to bicker but called me to minister the gospel.
For those that don't agree show me your fruit.I fully believe that when God calls someone fruit follows including wisdom.It is unwise to say who and who cannot scripturally preach the gospel as you may have to eat those words one day.It is also unwise to tell another person that they are wrong for exercising a part of the five fold ministry because you feel they are scripturally out of place.I see it as this.If a person whether male or female,bond or greek are ministers of truth...now I don't mean charismatic or non
truth teaching and are bearing fruit with signs following such as
many receiving the Holy Ghost etc.Then we need not to grieve the Holy Spirit of God.Being that whoever is for Him is not against Him.God judges his servants not man.For along time I did not even reveal my gender on this board for this specific reason.The reason being its hard enough to work out in the field of the gospel with Satan and spirits and mean sinners without hearing it from the brethren.Respectfully Sis.c

[CRNewton]

Those who oppose the rise of women preachers are labeled anti-women and that we are nothing more than chauvinists who are allowing female talent in the church to go atrophy. Well my feminized friend, the Bible gives a clear warning that we are not to follow the traditions of men, especially when they contradict the Bible so egregiously.

(Col 2:8 KJV) Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

God does not give these type of warnings in Scripture for the fun of it. They are there for a purpose. A serious question arises out of this. Are the traditions of men being followed by those who oppose or endorse women preachers? There is only one way to determine who is correct and that is to do comparison by means of the standard bearer, the Bible. Only the Bible can give us the final definitive answer.

The Scriptures teach a clear distinction between the roles of women and men. If either fall short in their individual responsibilities, they are, in essence, in rebellion against God. There are so many in the church today who try to make an argument for egalitarianism between male and female. This is a fallacious belief, in that it is common knowledge men and woman are different physically, emotionally, and mentally. Let me point out that this in no way means a superior/inferior relationship. It just brings to the surface the fact that God created men and women differently, body structure aside. When each man and woman obeys God in the areas of their roles, then this is the greatest good for society.

The husband is to provide for his family and to raise his children in the fear and admonition of the Lord. (Eph. 5:25-33; Colossians 3:18; 1 Tim. 5:8; Eph. 6:4)

(1 Pet 3:7 KJV) Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.

Notice the Scripture says, "AS" the weaker vessel, it does not say she is. It is a good thing she is not because we have much wimpy men around today who couldn't lead an ant colony. It is unfortunate though that many women believe the lies of the feminist camp (both inside and outside the church) that they are as strong or stronger than men. They have carried this belief into the military, business world, and the church. Where are they getting fuel from for this cavalcade of theory? Where else, the make believe world of television and movies. Even with all the hype, the obvious fact is that men and women are still different. They should never be in competition with each other but they should complement each other. When a marriage takes place, in the sight of God 1+1=1. So by looking at this equation, we see that neither the male nor female are total by themselves but the two together provide what they lack as individuals.

Women are commanded by God to be in subject unto their husbands (Gen. 3:16, 1 Corinthians 11:3, Ephesians 5:22, 33, Colossians 3:18, Titus 2:4-5, 1 Pet. 3:1-6). Even though these passages are unambiguous in their meanings, there are many who attempt to "alternately translate them." The different roles of both men and women are not strictly for the home only. The biblical distinctions must be adhered to in the visible church as well. The Bible, especially in 1 Corinthians 14, addresses many congregational problems at Corinth. One was Tongues and another was the role of women in the church.

(1 Tim 2:11-15 KJV) Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. {12} But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. {13} For Adam was first formed, then Eve. {14} And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. {15} Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

These passages are in complete harmony with what we read in 1 Corinthians 14 except God gives the reasons they are to be silent. Eve was the one deceived in the transgression and also Adam was formed first. Eve was to be his helpmeet not his ruling authority. Adam was the one whom God placed in charge of the creation. After the fall, Eve was told by God that her desire shall be to her husband and he will rule over her. This command of God was never rescinded anywhere else in Scripture either. Please keep in mind that male authority existed before the fall into sin and after the fall, both men and women were placed under the results of that fall. They were never cursed because God planned to save many in subsequent generations. The guilt of sin can be removed via salvation but we still must live under the effect of sin.

The roles which God gave to women and men have never been rescinded or modified in any way. The question is will we submit to the authority of the Bible or will we set up an authority of our own to appease our sin drenched natures.

[In His Service]

Dear Sarte and CR Newton,
Thank you for your post. I look forward to your thoughts as others post on this subject. Many people will state as a previous poster did that it is unwise to say who and who cannot scripturally preach the gospel. If we read the Gospel with understanding we will see that God specifically gave the qualifications of those that where to be part of the five fold ministery. How any can think that God would call someone and go against his divine qualifications given is certainly beyong me.

So many in the church today feel that only being in a preaching ministry is all that counts in the body. They forget what was spoken of in 1 Cor. 12 about the whole body working together. Not all are legs, not eye, not ears, but all have a vital place in the body of Christ. Not every man can be part of the five fold ministry nor can a women. But they can do wonderful works in the body of Christ. We see so many churches lacking in the other helps for the church and everyone wanting to be called a minister. Many feel that only the "Mininster" gets the special attention and they desire to be looked up too.

I honor the elders that labour in the gospel. I also honor those that clean the church, who work with the youth, who are prayer warriours, who are alter workers, who are in the choir, who are musicisans, etc......... All vital and important!!!!!!

We need to follow the Word of God on who he tells us can lead the church and then do our works for the Body with just as much gladness and enthusiasm as we would if we thought we where called to be a "Minister". To many chiefs and not enough indians all working together hurts the church.

Again thanks for the great post,
Bro. Timothy

[Oldpreach]

Havent had much time to post lately...but , after reading thru this thread since the last post that i read , i can see that its a bit more of what i have thought as of late. That is , once again , that some explain away Scripture that seems very black and white while offering no explanation of what it DOES mean.

Like i said before , this is what the Charismatics that i had to do with do ,as well as other denominals do with our basic tennants of faith such as oneness, baptism and ect.

Allrighty then , just one for you for now...

If "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence." DOES NOT mean that a woman should not teach a man publically in the assembly of the Saints , and have autority in the Church over him , but learn from the men and other Elders ....

Then , please explain what it DOES mean.


For your consideration , i give 2 other major versions of the above scriptures below:

NASB
Let a woman learn in quietness with all subjection. But I permit not a woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but to be in quietness. 13

NIV
A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.


Cant say i see the "under the husband" fiction here either....

[justavessel4him]

Hi Sis C,
I judt wanted to quickly answer a question you asked me. You said, "Sister Martha that is your opinion of the scriptures.What you just typed out was a teaching.Men read this and some of them learn from it.
I hope that I can write something here that someone can learn from. Otherwise, I why would I take the time? If a man chooses to read what I have written, then that is fine with me. I am doing no differently than Priscilla did. " And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly." There is a difference in expounding the word to someone on a personal one on one level and taking the office of preacher or teacher in the congregation.

[justavessel4him]

Prais the Lord Sarte,
I just wanted to thank you for your excellent post.

[ThirdGeneration]

Looking at the genderless call of ministry.......

I am not a Greek scholar, but I have found that I can go to www.crosswalk.com and find the underlying Greek words to any verse in Scripture.

One thing I found most surprising was that words like *he* and *his* are more or less filled in to make a smoother translation to English. Other words were treated in a masculine fashion even though the underlying Greek word was gender neutral to begin with.

To some extent, our English language does the same thing. Sometimes we use the word man when we actually mean "mankind."

The ONLY item in the third chapter of 1 Timothy that could give one pause about the gender issue is the idea expressed in the statement, "the husband(s) of one wife."

However, this must be considered in light of other facts that we know about the passage and Scripture in general:

1. The Ten Commandments spoke of not coveting thy neighbor's wife and yet no one would argue that the Ten Commandments were not applicable to women.

2. The qualification of being the husband of one wife is generally never used to exclude a single man or widow from pulpit ministry.

3. It is doubtful that Paul, Timothy and Titus would have qualified under such criteria.

4. "Let the DEACONS be the husband of one wife..." (1 Tim 3:12) Diakonos was the very same underlying Greek word translated as deacon here and Paul used for Phoebe (although men translated it as servant) in Romans 16:1.

1 This is a true saying, If a man [ei tis/ whosoever] desire the office of a bishop, he* desireth a good work.

2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;

4 One that ruleth well his* own house, having his* children in subjection with all gravity;

5 (For if a man [ei tis/ whosoever] know not how to rule his* own house, how shall he* take care of the church of God?)

6 Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he* fall into the condemnation of the devil.

7 Moreover he* must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

8 Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre;

9 Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience.

10 And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless.

11 Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things.

12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

13 For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.

Note- I do not believe that ruling a household is applicable to men only given that the Ten Commandments included honoring one's father AND mother. The Proverbs 31 woman certainly was one running her household. Finally, Proverbs written for a young man old enough to be seduced by harlots speaks of obeying one's mother (Proverbs 30:17).

[justavessel4him]

Praise The Lord CRNewton,
A big amen to you, too. You have brought out many things in your post above that I have included in a post that I am working on. It may be a day or two before I post it as I will be out of town for a couple of days. Anyway, I just wanted to say that I agree with you.

[justavessel4him]

Praise the Lord Bro. Tim,
You know I agree with you, but I didn't want you to feel left out. lol

Praise the Lord Bro. Oldpreach,
I am with you, I would also like to know just what those who think women can teach or preach in the congregation think the verses you quoted mean? I don't want to hear the old women being disruptive in church or it was the time they lived in. " All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:" It means the same thing for women today as it did for women in Paul's time.
By the way, did you see the pictures of my beautiful new granddaughter I sent to your sweet wife today?

[bishop1]

Well
I am thinking about a tribe in New Guinea, West Africa =
and maybe we can learn from them - -

When the woman nears child birth she prepares
a hammock and extra food for her husband.
She then goes off into the forrest alone to deliver her child.
She will then return to take care of both her newborn and her husband. He will remain bedridden for about an additional 10 days. He will suffer phantom labor pain and will moan and complain while she nurdes both he and his child.

{No doctor bills here}

[justavessel4him]

Praise The Lord Third,
Your arguments here just don't hold water. To try to say that the husband of one wife could be reversed in the above scripture makes absolutely no sense, because the Apostle went on to give the qualifications of the wife as well. The Greek word for husband used here is aner. It means an individual male, fellow, husband, man, sir. It has absolutely no female connotations at all.The word translated wife here is gune It means a woman or specifically a wife, wife, woman. It has absolutely no male connothations at all.

You also said, " I do not believe that ruling a household is applicable to men only given that the Ten Commandments included honoring one's father AND mother. The Proverbs 31 woman certainly was one running her household. Finally, Proverbs written for a young man old enough to be seduced by harlots speaks of obeying one's mother (Proverbs 30:17).
The Bible tells us plainly that the man is the head of the woman. The Proverbs 31 woman ran her home well, she did not rule it.

I will post more in a few days. I have some questions I would like to ask you, but I don't have time tonight.

[ThirdGeneration]

JV4H- I never suggested that "the husband of one wife" could have been translated any other way. Please read the post carefully.

Incidently, some scholars suggest that the verse about the qualifications for wives is actually one that has to with female ministers! The underlying Greek words support that possibility.

Note also that the verses in the 3rd chapter of Timothy speak of ruling one's "children" and "houses" well; which is not necesarily the same as being the head of one's spouse.

I maintain that the Proverbs woman certainly seemed to know how to run/rule her home well, as the Scripture shows.

[Sarte]

One may ask, why do some churches ordain women when there is nothing in the Scriptures about the ordination of women, and there were no women pastors in the NT church?

Their answer to this is that this situation prevailed only because men were culturally dominant at that time. The social customs of Bible times did not allow women to speak out or exercise their rights in society. And thus the church had to accept and adopt the same social discrimination against women.

In order to substantiate this idea, feminist supporters take slavery as a test case. They argue that slavery was likewise tolerated by the church, for the same reason – it was the norm at that time, although God’s plan was that slavery would one day be eliminated. Since society has now been delivered from slavery, the church is now able to take its proper against it. And since society has also been delivered from discrimination against women, the church must now take its proper stand against that as well, and allow women to be ordained as preachers and even as pastors.

In other words they interpret all the passages in Scripture that restrict the ministry of women in the church as passages that are meant strictly for the church at that time, and not for the church today. It was merely a temporary accommodation to the cultural situation of the times.

This argument sounds quite convincing, until one studies the passages themselves. Let us look at 1 Timothy 2:11-14 – “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.” Let us not misunderstand this passage when it says that women should be in silence. It is only against authoritative speaking, teaching and ruling by women in church.

What we need to note of in this passage however, is what the injunction is based on. It is based on two things: the order of creation, and the fall of man. The basis for reserving church authority for the men is not cultural at all, as the feminists claim. The basis is historical, and that means that it is a permanent precept. It cannot change, even when society changes.

Male Headship is based on the Order of Creation. The Bible tells us in Genesis 2 that God made the man first. Adam found himself alone and in need of a helpmeet. The Lord therefore put him to sleep, took out one of his ribs, and then made the first woman out of it. When Adam awoke and saw Eve, he named her “Woman” and the Lord united them. Hence the headship of the man is based on origins.

If the Lord had meant it to be otherwise, He would have done things differently. He would have created woman at exactly the same time and in exactly the same way as He created man – from the ground. But since man was created before woman, and since woman was created out of man, and since man also had the privilege to give woman her name, the headship of the man is permanently established, and it must stand permanently. And this is to be reflected for all time in the family, as well as in the church.

Thus we have seen that male headship already existed before the Fall took place and Adam demonstrated it by naming his wife “woman” after himself, “man”. This brings us to the other thing which is mentioned in 1 Timothy 2. Let us look at v.14 - “And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Among other things, the fall of man teaches us what can happen when the principle of male headship is violated. It was Eve who led Adam into sin. This is why, after the Fall, God told the woman that her husband shall rule over her (Genesis 3:16). The Lord was telling her to submit to her husband’s headship as she should have done when she was tempted.

Male Headship is not Based on the Curse of Sin. Feminist make a mistake of interpretation of this verse, Genesis 3:16. The statement “he shall rule over thee” comes directly after God pronounced the curse of sin affecting the woman. The whole verse reads: “Unto the woman He said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.” Thus they claim that male headship is part of the curse of Sin, and since Christ has now delivered us from the curse of sin, male headship must be dispensed with.

But if male headship is based on the curse of sin, then we may ask, Why does 1 Timothy 2 not refer to this as the basis of male headship? Why does it say in v.13 – “For Adam was first formed, then Eve” instead of saying, “For Eve was cursed with submission to Adam” ?

The faulty interpretation of Scripture that is being used to convince churches today to do away with male headship and allow women to serve as preachers and even pastors.

And this is the stand that we must continue to take even though it may go against the prevailing social opinion, and even though it may invite much criticism from the public and from other groups. We would probably be charged with violating the equality of men and women before God. Let me state once again that we fully uphold and teach the equality of men and women, because it is plainly taught in Galatians 3:28 - “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”

What this verse means is that men and women are equally bearers of the image of God. Both are equally sinners, equally deserving of judgment, and equally redeemable. But this verse cannot be extended to mean that all role distinctions are eliminated for Christians. God has made men and women to fulfil different roles in the home and in the church. Man is given the role of headship while women are given the role of submission. These roles must be maintained and not overstepped, for the proper function of both of these divine institutions.

One reason why many may find this hard to accept is that they have an negative view of this role of submission, perceiving it as being an unpleasant role, always on the receiving end. Wives are commanded by God to submit to their husbands (Ephesians 5:22) and women in the church are commanded to submit to the church leadership (1 Corinthians 14:34). But let us understand that submission does not turn a woman into a doormat, but rather a willing partner to her husband in the home, and a faithful follower of Jesus Christ in the church. In this, a woman follows the example of our Lord who willingly submitted Himself in the obedience of perfect love.

[ThirdGeneration]

Ddc- This one's for you! :beammeup:

It is not the critic who counts; not the one who points out how the strong person stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. [Or should not have done at all]!!

The credit belongs to the person who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by the dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, and comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself or herself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he or she fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his or her place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat. -Teddy Roosevelt


How did Paul show that he was called by God to the ministry in the face of those that would deny it?

1. His fruit (church plantings) 2 Corinthians 3:1-3;

2. The character in which he carried out the work of God (the meekness and gentleness of Christ) 2 Cor 10:1-2; and

3. And the hardship endured as he preached Christ (2 Cor 11:24-28).


Gamaliel spoke of the early church by saying, "And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought. 39 But it it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it, lest haply ye be found to fight against God (Acts 5:38-39).


Abraham Lincoln explained it like this, "I do the very best I know how- the very best I can: and mean to keep doing so until the end. If the end brings me out all right, what is said against me won't amount to anything. If the end brings me out wrong, ten angels swearing I was right would make no difference."

Ddc- Press on!!

[CRNewton]

Some women wishing to justify themselves claim certain "fruits" to prove thier calling. Often we have met the unsaved who also wishing to justify their error will speak of certain "touches, works, deeds and revelations" to confirm thier stand even though they are lost. Deeds and so-called fruits never over ride the Word of God! Transgression cannot be justified by claiming some spiritual feeling, nor can all the cheers of the crowd change the wrong into the right.

People may ask "why it is that sometimes blessing seems to attend the evangelistic work of women, even though they do not comply with the scriptural restrictions." We might ask a similar question in the reverse case: Why is it that some serve the Lord consistently with divine principles and see but little if any fruit? Who was it that said, ‘I have laboured in vain and spent my strength for nought’? It was our blessed Lord (Isa. 49:4)! God is not bound by His own restrictive principles that He cannot bless where there is non-compliance, but the servant must remember that ‘If a man strive for the mastery he is not crowned unless he strive lawfully’ (2 Tim. 2:5).”

God often blesses the ministry of His Word in spite of the errors of the minister. But in such cases the minister (whether it be man or woman) will only receive personal reward for the labor in as much as it was done according to the Word of God (1 Cor. 3:6-15).

My friends, beware of being influenced by the rebellion of the hour. God forbids a woman from preaching and usurping authority over the man. He forbade this 1900 years ago, and He forbids it today.

Let the woman learn in silence, with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, was in the transgression (1 Tim. 2:11-14).

Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak: but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also says the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord (1 Cor. 14:34-37).

[ThirdGeneration]

Sarte- You have yet to explain how why the historical reasons given by Paul were not applicable to Deborah in the OT.....

Are you aware that the Ephesus church had a particularly tough problem with false teachings that were circulating? In fact, so bad was the situation that Paul kept Timothy there to counteract the threat (1 Tim 1:3). Are you aware that the "certain men" (tisi) that were spreading false teachings could be better translated as certain people since tisi does not indicate gender?

Are you aware that the Scripture notes many false teachers abounded in the Ephesus church spreading false ideas? (1 Tim 1:4-7,20; 4:7; 5:13, 6:3-5)

Are you aware that it is a historic fact that there was a cult in Ephesus that celebrated the woman as the hero because she ate the forbiden fruit which brought knowledge into the world? (Kroeger, I Suffer Not a Woman" 1992, p87-98).

Thus, we can appreciate why Paul would bring up the garden of Eden showing the woman was decieved rather than a hero that was superiour to the man as the Gnostic cult taught.

Note that Paul was not saying that only women are decieved since he uses Eve as a warning to ALL the Corinthian church to be on guard against deception (2 Cor 11:3). Instead, it appears that Paul was simply refuting the idea that woman was superior to man because she sought wisdom.

To think that our Sprituality would be bound by the sins of Adam and Eve flies in the face of our new birth theology.

After all, are we still bound by our sins (or anothers) after the cross? If we have truly been set free, then why must we carry Eve upon our backs? Are we new creatures in Christ or not?

I believe Paul would be shocked to see how his prohibition against inexperienced and/or dominating women teaching, got translated into the idea that all women were prohibited from ministering otherwise.

He might understand it if that were the only book of the Bible that we ever read; but we have 65 other books to look at.

Paul would shake his head in disbelief that we thought women were just partially set free in Christ. He would find it very shocking that we don't even grasp the basics; that the blood of Jesus separates us from past sins.

[justavessel4him]

Are you aware that the Ephesus church had a particularly tough problem with false teachings that were circulating? In fact, so bad was the situation that Paul kept Timothy there to counteract the threat (1 Tim 1:3). Are you aware that the "certain men" (tisi) that were spreading false teachings could be better translated as certain people since tisi does not indicate gender?

Have you considered the fact that maybe part of the false teaching going around was that it was okay for women to preach and that is why Paul addressed the issue? I'm not saying it was, but only a possibility. The only thing we know for sure is that Paul was under the inspiration of an spoke as the oracle of the Holy Ghost. And he did not speak only to the church of that day, but to the church as a whole throughout the generations. Remember, "Whatsoever you bind on earth...

Thus, we can appreciate why Paul would bring up the garden of Eden showing the woman was decieved rather than a hero that was superiour to the man as the Gnostic cult taught.

Look at those verses again, " Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13. For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
In verses 11 and 12 Paul gives the commandment. In verse 13 and 14v he gives the reason why. That word "for" means because.

I believe Paul would be shocked to see how his prohibition against inexperienced and/or dominating women teaching, got translated into the idea that all women were prohibited from ministering otherwise.

Coiuld you give me chapter and verse showing that Paul only spoke concerning inexperienced and/or dominating women? Although I do concede that all women who seek to preach are undoubtedly motivated by a dominating spirit.

I still have much more that I will post later as time permits.

[In His Service]

3rd,
Your taking the cake lately, LOL LOL!!!!!

Why is it that you see submission as a curse? You too seem to want to suggest that each book of the bible was only written to a particular church and was not intended to be used by any other christians other than that church. Is that what you believe?

To think that the Proverbs woman's work for her family in her home was suggesting that she was the ruler of the home, well, just is corrupt in its seed of thought. How does that portion of scripture begin? "11. The heart of her husband doth safely trust in her, so that he shall have no need of spoil.
12. She will do him good and not evil all the days of her life. ' Even by your own thoughts and ideas of how you believe the woman's place was in the OT, this goes against your own arguements but suggesting that she was the ruler of the house while you state she never had any authority? Can you not see you are going against your own ideas here?

3rd, you have failed to prove that Deborah held more than a civil office. You can not place her in the Priestly order, nor can you state that she judged religious matters for the Word of God shows that the Priest judged those things and even was called in to help with what might be an appeal in our day and age. The priest had the last say of pronounceing judgement in those cases.

Your arguement that the portion of scriptures that are stating that a "Man" had to rule his house well and have his children under subjection is then speaking as meaning "Mankind" and not a masculine usage of "Man" will not hold water. Study your greek a little more and see how a masculine usage also will be in line with what is being spoken. Maybe I can copy and paste a simple greek lesson on gender usage in greek if you like.

3rd I really feel that you are digging a bigger whole for the teaching you believe that women can or did or would hold the 5 fold ministry.

My comments will be hit and miss for a few days. My wife will be out of town and I have 4 little ones to watch and take care of. When the are down for naps or out playing I will try to check and make brief comments if I can.

Praying for you,
Bro. timothy

[bishop1]

Let me tell you about my uncle.
He had a mule with a sumission problem.

Many times I saw him hit that stupid mule with a 2X4
trying to train that mule to be obedient.
That mule was so stubborn that it would not drink water
until it fell down.
My uncle would tell me that GOD was testing him with that mule. The lessons that he was learning by training that mule would probally be very useful to him later in life.


THEN
MY UNCLE
GOT MARRIED !
{to a very headstrong woman}

*Observing them I have often wondered that mule ever taught my uncle anything.
:D :beammeup: :D :bow:

[ThirdGeneration]

IHS- The epistles of Paul were generally written to the churches that bear their name and ALL believers. We glean this from the salutation at the beginning of each epistle. However, the epistles to Timothy do NOT contain this general type of salutation but rather are addressed to Timothy only.

We know that all Scripture is given by the inspiration of God. Nevertheless, we can better understand Scriptural application when we understand the context in which it was given. Historically we have always narrowed down the application of the teachings in the epistles of Paul by suggesting that they are written to those that already had been baptized in Jesus name and filled with the Holy Ghost....

I have never suggested that the woman in Proverbs had authority over her husband, but rather spoke of her household (servants) and children. Note that the verses in Timothy speak of ruling one's house and children rather than speaking directly about one's spouse (4, 5,12).

Incidently, a wife had whatever authority her husband gave her. As far as I can tell, she had no legal authority of her own. See the 30th chapter of Numbers to verify that.

For if a MAN know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God? (1 Tim 3:5)

Note that MAN in this verse is actually the Greek word, Ei tis, meaning "whoever." I find this same Greek word used in the following verses which are clearly applicable to women also.

Then Jesus said unto his disciples, If any MAN (Ei tis) shall come after me, let him* deny himself, and take up his* cross and follow me (Matt 16:24).

And he said unto them, He (Ei tis) that hath ears, let him* hear (Mark 4:9).

But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any MAN (Ei tis) have not the Spirit of Christ, he* is none of his (Romans 8:9).

The use of Ei tis (68 times) in Scripture appears to be gender neutral. Paul could have used a word that was much more indicative of gender than Ei tis.

The qulifications in 1 Timothy and Titus appear to go to stability and reputation rather than the sex of the individual.

1. This seems so given that Paul, Timothy and Titus would be excluded from ministry if literally applied.

2. This seems so in that there is no place in these qualifications where Paul uses the word for man (#435 Aner) that usually excludes women.

3. This seems so depsite the fact that he does talk about the "husband of one wife" which is about in the same league as the Ten Commandment's admonishment not to covet thy neigbor's wife.

4. This seems so given that Phoebe is described with the very same Greek word, "diakonos" in Romans 16:1; despite the fact that Paul describes said qualifications needed, as including one wife!

[ThirdGeneration]

IHS- I never suggested Deborah was a priest. So what that she was not? She had equal authority with the priests when it came to judgment according to the 17th chapter of Deuteronomy.

Note that Deborah was not one of the judges that the people appointed to sit at the gates (Deut 16:18). She was "the judge" that was raised up and led by God (Judges 2:18). She judged Isreal for 40 years (Judges 4:4; 5:31).

Btw- What is civil law in a theocracy? What cases would a civil judge decide as opposed to the priests? A case involving false weights which are an abomination to God? A case involving false witness? A case involving a man picking up sticks on the sabbath?

You concede that on the tough stuff, the priest and the judge acted together; but then you suggest that the priest made the final call. Huh?

And thou shalt come unto the priests the Levites, and unto THE JUDGE that shall be in those days, and enquire; and THEY shall shew thee the sentence of judgment (Deuteronomy 17:9).

We know that God moved through Deborah. After all, she was raised up by God and the Lord was with her (Judges 2:18). The Scripture speaks of her being a prophetess (Judges 4:4).

We know that she led leaders. When was the last time you asked the president to stop by your office so you could discuss the war with him? Did he come running?

IHS- Where does the Bible say that women cannot be a part of the 5 fold ministry?

[In His Service]

3rd,
Took a quick break and checked the boards. Your getting to be a riot too!!! Are you and searching kin folk!!!

Let me see so we throw out both books to Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews, 1,2,3 John since they where not directed to a group but to the Pastor's of those groups? Seems you would want to take away from the Word of God in your desire to prove your ideas? Why not take all of the Word?

Isn't it interesting that where the leadership of the church is spoken of that it is always the masculine usage and never a neutral or feminine usage? Wonder why? The sentence structure would show in each even if a word would be neutral as to what gender the word is directed as.

3rd, please show how Elders or Bishops could possibly be feminine in usage in the Greek.

Thanks
Timothy

[bishop1]

A MULE HAS BIG EARS

[ThirdGeneration]

Whoa! IHS- Please carefully read my posts. I did not say anything about throwing out any part of God's Word! I did say that we need to look at it in the context it was written.

Timothy and Titus were both written to Paul's "sons" in the gospel and speak to the situaltion they find themselves in.

Hebrews has no salutation, although it was obviously written for the churches given the content. The lack of salutation is one of the reasons that most scholars feel that Paul was not the actual writer.

1 John bears the marks of being written for a general audience, "my little children".

Philemon, 2 & 3 John do appear to be personal letters that allow us to capture a glimpse of what Christianity looked like when these letters were written.

So, are you really trying to suggest that the Greek language is different from English and Spanish in that the masculine version of a word does not cover a mixed audience?

I wonder why Bible Scholars have failed to argue this before....

[Oldpreach]

I posted the below last night...and got no response from the other side on this issue...could what i say below be just that true???

Havent had much time to post lately...but , after reading thru this thread since the last post that i read , i can see that its a bit more of what i have thought as of late. That is , once again , that some explain away Scripture that seems very black and white while offering no explanation of what it DOES mean.

Like i said before , this is what the Charismatics that i had to do with do ,as well as other denominals do with our basic tennants of faith such as oneness, baptism and ect.

Allrighty then , just one for you for now...

If "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence." DOES NOT mean that a woman should not teach a man publically in the assembly of the Saints , and have autority in the Church over him , but learn from the men and other Elders ....

Then , please explain what it DOES mean.


For your consideration , i give 2 other major versions of the above scriptures below:

NASB
Let a woman learn in quietness with all subjection. But I permit not a woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but to be in quietness. 13

NIV
A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.


Cant say i see the "under the husband" fiction here either.... Also , the "women shouting out in the meetings" thing i have yet to find in any NT book. Can someone plez tell me which one it is in? Because i see it being toted around here as being equal in absolute certainty as Scripture itself ! A speculation built on a presupmtion cannot be used as part of "line upon line" Biblical doctrine unless the truth of said presumption can be assertained with complete certainty. This goes for other half truth "doctrines" that some of us hold also such as being insistant that children be baptized right after they receive the Holy Spirit , or denying leadership and eldership to men that have beards. Dig it ?

[bishop1]

'SAY ON ELDER'

[Nawbee]

To oldpreacher:
Then women are to say nothing in church: NOTHING???

Are they to not rustle or breathe? I mean, silence means silence, does it not?

Do you allow your wife to learn from the preacher?

If you do you are a hypocrite, are you not? If she wants to learn anything she must learn it from you at home, right?

If your wife is to submit to all men, am I not included? Where are the verses then to resolve this conflict? How can she submit to all men and do as I say as well as what you say if we disagree?

As for the Scripture that covers our deductions, it's this one:

1 Thessalonians 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

And this point is honed, here:

1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not [the author] of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

If you are right then God IS the author of confusion. If you are right there is no freedom in Christ since all women are slaves to men.

No response?

That's because this has been proven ad nausium.

If you can't see that women are equal to men in the Kingdom of God and that submission "to the man" only extends to their own husbands, then it is because this is hidden from you...

If your interpretation is correct, then this is a lie:

Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

So is this:

1 Peter 5:5 Likewise, ye younger, submit yourselves unto the elder. Yea, all [of you] be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble.

Humble yourselves and this will not be that tough an issue.

[bishop1]

My Dad actually believed that there will be

30 MINUTES OF SILENCE IN HEAVEN !


_ THEN


GOD will let the women in !

[Nawbee]

:D

[ThirdGeneration]

Nawbee- Great points.

Old Preach- Don't even think of attempting to discredit the poster. Such a strategy does nothing for your argument.

Now what was it?

[Oldpreach]

Third , i have no idea what your talking about. Just speaking my mind from Wayyyyyyy before i ever posted here. Also , thnks for not answering the question in the post as to what it all does mean. I thought you were deeper than this. You will spend 10 posts and hours of research to explain something away...why not explain what it does mean? From what i get so far in this and other threads that have dealt with this scripture that you have wrote , it seems these scriptures mean almst nothing. Saying Nawbee had great points , while again he did not explain what the scripture does mean rather that what it doesnt is again more of the same. Well , the question still remains...what does it mean then? No takers it seems , and its just the same old dose o' stuff.

Nawbee , you wrote :

"Then women are to say nothing in church: NOTHING???

Are they to not rustle or breathe? I mean, silence means silence, does it not?"

Did you even bother to read the post that i made above? Did i say that? No , i didnt. You r responing to things that i didnt even put there! More of the same it seems....explain it all away and offer no explaination of what it does mean.

Well , seems like a predictable showing so far....unless you all bother.....if you have the goods , as they say. Its not hard , just explain what it means to you....verse by verse. If you dont , then you arent offering any critical thought , but just bellowing out emotionalism like the non-thinking political left. You all tout yourselves to be this kind of intellectual elite when it comes to scripture and such. To me , so far as an honest observer , taking off the Apostolic clothing for a moment , its more like you sound just like the folks that have no explainations , but rather just skip on to the next semi-related tangent, leaving the inquiring standing there with a question mark above their heads still.

Again third , what arguement ? All i asked is for what it does mean...

[Nawbee]

To oldpreacher:
I read it. Every letter.

Please return the courtesty by actually reading the page after page WE have written that already answered your every point. In fact, not only did we sink with irrefutable logic and compassionate reasoning in the Word the points you raise again (and, I might add, your reading will expose others who were much more eloquent and cogent), but you will find that we refuted the foundational arguments as well as any extrapolary themes as well.

This is twice you have falsely accused me, friend. Is God in the business of false accusations?

I sit eager to forgive if you shall only repent.

[In His Service]

Newbee,
irrefutable logic?
1 Cor. 1:19. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
20. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

1 Corinthians 2

1. And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God.
2. For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.
3. And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling.
4. And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the spirit and of power:
5. That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.

11. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
12. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
13. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
14. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

I think these scriptures pretty much wrap up what God things of an individuals irrefutable logic that comes only from worldly reasoning and not following what is written in the Word of God as it is written. To follow the logic that you have spoken of one has to suppose what might have been meant from what was written, one must say that Paul, probably meant this or that, since a book was just written to a Man then it was not really for all the churches but just His church, etc.... and the list could go on and on and on.

Reality check time,
Bro. timothy

[In His Service]

3rd,
I see you have not given your greek feminine usage when it is recorded as masculine as of yet. As to your other question. Maybe the following will help you to understand in greek exactly how we are to see the gender usage. A group of people might be referred to as masculine, but the sentence would refer to a mixed group.

Hope this helps,
Every noun must fall into one of three categories of gender: masculine, feminine, or neuter. The fact of gender, when considering a word in isolation, is of little importance to the student of the Greek New Testament. But in analyzing a sentence as a whole, gender may play a key role, especially when considered along with the adjectives, pronouns, and relative clauses that may be present. Taking note of the gender may alter altogether what a sentence may seem to be saying in English.
For example: "And receive...the sword of the spirit which is the word of God"( Eph 6:17). The word "sword" in Greek is feminine gender and the word "spirit" is neuter gender. So it is important in this sentence to find out what is the antecedent of the relative pronoun "which". (i.e. What is the "which" referring back to?) The word "which" in this sentence is neuter, therefore it is referring back to the word "spirit" and not "sword." Thus this sentence means: "And receive...the sword of the spirit which (spirit) is the word of God."

Bro. Timothy

[In His Service]

ps 3rd,
Yes we must read the context that any of the Word is written. This does not mean however that it does not apply to the whole church in situations that are similiar.

I wonder why you keep referring back to "Scholars". How many of them can even understand Jesus Name baptism or the Oneness of God? To rely on thier ideas on issues such as this when they can't get past the basics is shifting ground.

Bro. timothy

[Nawbee]

In His Service:
I think these scriptures pretty much wrap up what God things of an individuals irrefutable logic that comes only from worldly reasoning and not following what is written in the Word of God as it is written.

Me:
Good for you!

That doesn't apply to anything I have written, however...

:D

[tufluv]

Bro. Tim:
Good morning! and :tup: to your posts! You my dear brother, have that 'patience of JOB' I'm praying to receive!! Think I'll just take notes! :bow:
Rudeness is something I have little patience with, glad you're good at it, for you have your job cut out for ya!

[Nawbee]

Do you allow your wife to make any noise in church, IHS??? Do you allow her to learn anything from any man other than yourself, and that, only in the home?

If not, then you certainly do not accept the Word "as it is written".

What, then is God's take on hypocrites?

[In His Service]

Newbee,
Sure I do newbee, I read all of the Word and take it line upon line and precept upon precept. When understanding of what is written in all the Word is present, you don't ask questions like the one you just did.
Bro. Timothy

[In His Service]

Newbee,
We can read where all of Cornelius house believed and was filled with the Holy Ghost. That means they spoke in tongues in a audible voice correct? Do you think only that men where there? So we see that speaking in tongues would be perfectly acceptable for women.

Acts 19

1. And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,
2. He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
3. And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.
4. Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
5. When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
6. And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. A gathering of disciples with Paul preaching. Seems like church to me. And look the spoke in tongues and prophesied.
That again shows that a women might speak in tongues and even prophesy in a church service.

Should we go on,
Bro. Timothy

[ThirdGeneration]

IHS- I gather from your Greek lesson that masculine and feminine nouns may have nothing whatsoever to do with who the noun might normally be associated with given that sword is feminine.

I will repeat until you prove different. There is ABSOLUTELY NO gender distinction in the underlying Greek mentioned in the 3 chapters of the Bible that deal with God gifting the church, the uniqueness of the members of the body of Christ and the five fold ministry. NONE

Carefully read 1 Corinthians 12; Romans 12 and Ephesians 4. Note that gender NEVER comes up.

I think it ludicrous to think that Paul forgot to mention such a detail if it were an issue.

[Xerf]

Yeah! And I think it is an outrage that people ask questions like, "Did she have her baby yet, what was it a boy or a girl?" Down with this gender specifics! They should say, "Did the bearer have its baby yet, was it ok?" And at the birth of it there should be no gender naming going on but rather a genderless number should be issued to it, like 372-32-7891! SO that for the rest of its life little 372 would never feel intimidated by its gender! In in time the word "gender" would fade into nonexistance itself! OH glorious day!!!

:rolleyes:

[In His Service]

3rd,
You will note in I Cor. 12 that when speak of the Apostles and Prophets, Teachers that these words are masculine and not neurtral. They show to be gender specific because they are offices. The other things listed after these are the gifts of the Spirit. These apply to the whole body.

Paul is plainly trying to show here that just because one is not an Apostle, Prophet or teacher does not mean that they are not still important to the body of Christ. The whole chapter is showing that each is important. Notice in verse 28. God set some in the church, First Apostles, second prophets, thirdly teachers. Those are named in order for a reason and show a distinction from the others as to who so every might recieve.

The other two instances you speak of are clearly written to the church as a whole and speak as how we are all members of the Body of Christ and can all work for the Kingdom of God.

You are correct that there is no gender distinction as to who may recieve the gifts of the Spirit. You can not include the five fold ministry in the gifts of the Spirit. They are not included but are a seperate distinct leadership role for the Church.

You can not also disprove that the Bishops, Elders, Deacons are masculine in thier meaning and that the entire sections dealing with such show clearly a marked difference of gender. You can not do it.

Paul did mention the details in his writings to the church, some just miss them for what ever reason.
Bro. Timothy

[ThirdGeneration]

Originally posted by In His Service
You will note in I Cor. 12 that when speak of the Apostles and Prophets, Teachers that these words are masculine and not neurtral.
IHS- I find that the following are listed as feminine nouns:

governments
church
ministry

Does a Greek feminine noun preclude men from any office in government, church or ministry? Of course not!

You are barking up the wrong tree to suggest that the certain words belong exclusively to one gender because of how they are identified for purposes of grammar usage.

You have shown us nothing to indicate that these "offices" were intended to be limited to men. Their "identity" as a a masculine, feminine, or neuter noun obviously can not relate to exclusion of one gender or another given the variety of words we have already found feminine including "sword."

[In His Service]

3rd,
The three words (governments, church, ministry) you have spoke of can apply to male or female in the body of Christ. None of them are speaking of the Five fold ministry.

However you have not yet to show that Bishop, Elder, Deacon, Apostle, Prophet, Teacher when spoken of in the Word of God is used as Feminine. Why Not? Simple enough to answer, because you can not do it.

When a masculine or Feminine usage is used in a sentence we look at the entire sentence and other supporting sentences to understand to whom the speaker is talking to. If in a book of writings, such as the Word of God, that we know that in the writings that, say such as Bishop, is speaking as being a man then its usage when speaking of that office, in other areas, will them be masculine also. To say otherwise would be to contradict what is written.

Bro. Timothy

[Sarte]

There are three genders in Greek: masculine, feminine, and neuter. Contrary to English, all nouns are of a specific gender, and there is no way to predict the gender from the semantics of the noun, a point which causes a lot of frustration to learners of Greek. For example, the wall is masculine, the door feminine, and the floor neuter. Learners of Greek who become native speakers of the language learn to associate the gender as something inherent to each specific noun, adjective, article, etc. Gender names in Greek: áñóåíéêü, èçëõêü, ïõäÝôåñï.

Grammatical Gender of Nouns

Gender, as it relates to nouns and other substantives in the Greek language, does not necessarily refer to "male" and "female". It refers to grammatical gender, which is determined purely by grammatical usage and must be learned by observation. Although nouns referring to people or animals that are obviously "male" or "female" would normally (but not always) be classified as masculine or feminine accordingly, the gender of most nouns seems to be somewhat arbitrary. Every noun must fall into one of three categories of gender: masculine, feminine, or neuter. The fact of gender, when considering a word in isolation, is of little importance to the student of the Greek New Testament. But in analyzing a sentence as a whole, gender may play a key role, especially when considered along with the adjectives, pronouns, and relative clauses that may be present. Taking note of the gender may alter altogether what a sentence may seem to be saying in English.
For example: "And receive...the sword of the spirit which is the word of God"( Eph 6:17). The word "sword" in Greek is feminine gender and the word "spirit" is neuter gender. So it is important in this sentence to find out what is the antecedent of the relative pronoun "which". (i.e. What is the "which" referring back to?) The word "which" in this sentence is neuter, therefore it is referring back to the word "spirit" and not "sword." Thus this sentence means: "And receive...the sword of the spirit which (spirit) is the word of God."


As one can PLAINLY see from this gender noun relationship is that Paul's usage of the Greek is just as he says it is. The ministry is a MALE ministry.

Those that wish to separate the gender from the noun knows nothing of real Greek grammar. Period.

[ThirdGeneration]

IHS- ROFLOL What you assert as truth is the issue we argue! Can't you see that?

At least you concede that there is no actual gender mentioned in the three whole chapters that speak to the church about ministering in the church (1 Corinthians 12; Romans 12 and Ephesians 4).

You are arguing instead that we must interpret these offices to be masculine only based on your beliefs rather than it being specifically stated in the Word of God.

It does not say "God will only set men in the church as...."

I, on the other hand; think that Paul was more than capable to convey as simple of a truth as gender restrictions in ministry if this were so.

Do you not see any irony in agreeing that God gives women spiritual gifts for the edification of the church, but then denying them the ability to use them?

Sarte- You stated "As one can PLAINLY see from this gender noun relationship is that Paul's usage of the Greek is just as he says it is. The ministry is a MALE ministry"

Huh???? You are directly contradicting your posted Greek lesson. But you don't see that, do you?

It makes me wonder if you have been posting your original work.

Hmm....

[In His Service]

3rd,
Why is it that you think that the five fold ministry is the same thing as the Spiritual Gifts?

Would you care to explain why you see them not being seperate?

Why is it that you will acknowledge that there where no women in the five fold ministry as recorded in the Word of God but want to assert that it would happen later in the future. When do you assert that the Church added women to the ministry? What year or time frame? Don't think it would have been a lot more shocking than the Gentiles being included. And since Ephesus was a strong women's cult what better place to have started the women in the five fold ministry? Would they not have accepted it there readily? Wonder why Paul spoke against rather than for it there?

Also do you really understand the gender noun relationship?

Bro. Timothy

[Nawbee]

IHS:
That again shows that a women might speak in tongues and even prophesy in a church service.

Me:
Hence, the hypocrisy of yourself and Oldpreacher and those like yourselves, since the bible clearly says:

1 Corinthians 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but [they are commanded] to be under obedience, as also saith the law.

If we are to take this literally as it is written, then God violated this "law" Himself.

Well, that or like I said, Paul was speaking of outbursts that were out of order in the services.

Why too would you and Oldpreacher say that I cannot deduce facts from the text and then seek so diligently to do so yourselves?

This only proves that there is more to the text than a casual, literal reading provides. I and those like me have only used history and a consistency of line upon line and precept upon precept to establish the proper context of the text.

Others come at it with a preconcieved prejudice which they then invent more and more "Word" to somehow paste it all together.

The key to the underlying context is in the word "obedience", not the word "silence"

;)

Obedience to the man, in the biblical sense ALWAYS refers only to the husband who is himself obedient to Christ Jesus.

To those whom God has Granted Sight, the difference will be easily discerned.

To those whom He has Denied Sight, it is their sins they wish to maintain in the darkness, the greatest of these being pride, that will, in the end, damn them because they will not seek Salvation.

To that end I do not strive with those who are willfully blinded.

In the public forum however, I do seek to be Weilded of God to give an Answer for why I bear about this Hope!

[Sarte]

I say again, Old Greek had three genders: masculine, feminine, and neuter. Because the word for man/husband anêr is masculine in gender, any adjective modifying the word must be in the masculine gender as is the word heis. Likewise, the same is true for the word for wife/woman gunê; it must take the feminine gender and cannot take the masculine in order to be grammatically correct.

A bishop then must be blameless, the HUSBAND OF ONE WIFE, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach...« (1Ti 3:2, KJV)

Let not a widow be taken into the number under threescore years old, having been the WIFE OF ONE MAN...« (1Ti 5:9, KJV)

It appears, Third, that it is you that is in error. You wish to discredit all Greek grammar with a LOL. Hardly. Besides, as you told another, "Wishing to discredit the poster adds nothing to your case."

You need a Greek grammar 101 refresher course. You miss the entire point of the statement.

[Nawbee]

The point in all this in the Greek that is almost always overlooked is this passage:

1 Timothy 3:11 Even so [must their] wives grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things.

As you see here, the possesive was [b]ADDED. Without that bit of addition, rather than the Greek word being rendered "wives", the verse actually reads:

"Even so must women grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things."

So, you have Paul admonishing [b]MEN AND WOMEN in how to handle the offices of bishop and deacon.

To argue over verse tense and adjective/adverb gender agreement (and for the record, that is almost arbitrary in Greek) in the face of such overwhelming proof of original intent of the writer, is truly to swallow camels while straining out gnats.

[tufluv]

XERF:
Your recent post in this sections deserves a :tup:
most astute of you, O'wiseOne (or was that O'wise-crackOne)! lol
Sounds like the 'worldly' attitude on non-gender politically correct association, MORE of that 'unisex' fad :eek: still lingering.

[ThirdGeneration]

IHS - Would you have us believe that the 5 fold ministry is devoid of spiritual gifts?

Spiritual gifts are given for the edification of all (1 Cor 12:7). Spiritual gifts include prophecy, ministering, teaching, exhorting, and ruling (Romans 12:6-8).

Jesus told the parable that condemned the servant that did not put his talent to work, but rather hid it in the ground.

I have not acknowledged that there were no women in the 5 fold ministry recorded in the Word of God. We have reason to believe there may have been. But I acknowledge that honest hearts could argue that issue.

What I pointed out in saying that, was that even if there was not recorded women leading churches, I do not see that as relevant in our world today where woman are 1) not considered property; 2)educated; 3)have equal access to religious training; and 4) are not tied down to children all of their lives.

I do not think it more shocking that Gentiles could be saved then the idea that women could minister given the Jewish mindset. The Jewish people were always suppose to be kind to the stranger in their land since they had been strangers in Egypt.

We have Paul repeatedly stating in his letter to Timothy that the Ephesus church was under severe attack for false doctrines, old wives fables, doctrines of devils, etc. It hardly seems to be the place to put a women who may have just recently come out of one of these cults into a position of leadership. Paul said the women needed to learn and that they should not usurp authority. You would not put a man in authority under such circumstances either.

Remember Titus (the only true Gentile we know of that ministered) was mentored directly by Paul. He likely had spent years with him before Paul entrusted him to lead.

IHS- As long as sword, church, ministry and government are considered feminine nouns as to Greek grammar; I remain entirely unpersuaded by an argument that the Greek male nouns suggest that female exclusivity was intended.

[Nawbee]

How is it that these Greek scholars missed the fact that there are only four offices mentioned, not five, in the Greek text?

[In His Service]

3rd,
You stated, What I pointed out in saying that, was that even if there was not recorded women leading churches, I do not see that as relevant in our world today where woman are 1) not considered property; 2)educated; 3)have equal access to religious training; and 4) are not tied down to children all of their lives.

3rd to argue you point above you then have to say that the Word of God has to change as times change. I did ask you or Newbee one, can't remember which, do show why you say women where not educated in the jewish society at all, nor had any religious trainging. And tied to children all thier lives? Well Sarah did have a child late in life, LOL LOL!!!!! I guess the change in life comes so much more early now in our society than then?

Sister you are argueing a women's lib stance and not a bible stance. It might sound good to those that believe what you say about women, but to those of us who see women as treasures it just don't fly.

And do you assume that all the letters that Paul wrote where to Jewish churches? Seems he was the Apostole to the Gentiles as I read? Why do you forget such things?

Bro. Timothy

[In His Service]

Nawbe,
Four and not five?
11. And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

How do you read 4 and not five? Is it because there is not a some before teachers?

My greek text shows the five also.
Bro. Timothy

[Nawbee]

While I have come to realize that you and I will not communicate because that requires you to listen as well as speak, I will post this for others.

In the Greek when you have a list of names or descriptors and the word "kai" is used between any of them, it is the same as saying, "moreover" or "also known as" in English.

The Greek for "and some pastors and teachers" reads: "de (and) ho (these others) poymane (pastors) kahee (kai) didaskalos (teachers)"

Or, in English: "and others, pastors, moreover, teachers." or "and others, pastors, also known as teachers."

So, there are four offices, not five.

This being the case, how can any say that God endorses a "five fold ministry" (and they really mean a "five fold minister" in the office of pastor but I won't go there now) when there never was five, but only four?

To make the point, Paul, you remember, the guy who PENNED Ephesians, would have been astounded at the concept of a "five fold ministry". He clearly wrote that a pastor and a teacher have the same ministry, moreover, office.

Again, it simply comes down to who has more authority. Paul as Lead by the Holy Ghost or you and those who support this invention of men.

I'll go with Paul. Especially since his word has been Confirmed by the Living Spirit of God as His Word, not only in the ages past but in this very day to those who will only listen.

[Oldpreach]

Well , Nawbee , i mistook you for apostle one time , so i apologize for that. But, the whole thread i did read...and it didnt explain, thats why i asked....come on !

Thnks for never answering...you and third and the few others. Yes , its just more of the same...no answers , just explaining away the simply truths of the Bible while offering no real explaination other than "anything goes" chaos. You cant even read my short little post and respond point by point.

[In His Service]

newbee,
You said, I'll go with Paul. When did you start going with Paul? :~) Seems you have been against him mostly!

[Nawbee]

To IHS:
I have not been against Paul. Only false doctrine.

[Nawbee]

To Oldpreacher:
I serve God. Not you.

[Oldpreach]

Its "oldpreach" not "oldpreacher". Its just a nickname...and its one i borrowed from a great man of God.

You know , maybe you are in the "false brother" Category after all. I thought i was being too harsh...but , if your my Brother , i would hate to see what my enemies would say to me !

Still the question goes unanswered....i suppose it truly is like what i suspected....you all just cant explain things...just explain them away ?

[In His Service]

Newbee,
Prove that by the Word of God!!! :~)
Bro. Timothy

[Nawbee]

Titus 3:10 A man that is a heretic after the first and second admonition reject; 11 Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.

[ThirdGeneration]

Old Preach- I am restating part of a post already on the board that I feel answered your questions as to how I would interpret Paul's instructions to Timothy.

If this does not satisfy you, please list the questions I leave unadressed. I will be glad to answer them.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IF I were looking at the second chapter of 1 Timothy without any other knowledge, I might also have reached the same conclusion as others.

However, since the instructions given seem to contradict our basic doctrine that the blood of Jesus redeems us from the curse of sin I must dig deeper.

Additionally these few verses in Timothy make gender distinctions that were not made in the 3 chapters written to three different churches that dealt with God's gifting for ministry.

We also know that women were already teaching and prophecying in the NT without being censured. (Consider Priscilla, Phillip's daughters and the church at Corinth/chapter 11).

And finally, we have to question why Deborah could lead Isreal in the OT given that:

a. Paul brought up statement about the Garden of Eden which would seemingly have precluded Deborah of the OT from leadership if that were the basis for prohibiting women in leadership today.

b. It does not make sense that women that are blood bought and Spirit filled should be less likely to be used by God now in leadership capacity, then in the OT.

After all, Jesus told us that the least in the kingdom were going to be greater than John the Baptist whom Jesus described as the greater than all the other prophets (Matt 11:11).

What It Might Mean--------------------------------------------------

It appears that the Ephesus church had a particularly tough problem with false teachings that were circulating (1 Tim 1:4-7,20; 4:7; 5:13, 6:3-5).

In fact, so bad was the situation that Paul kept Timothy there to counteract the threat (1 Tim 1:3). "Certain men" (tisi) that were spreading false teachings could be better translated as certain people since tisi does not indicate gender.

It is a historic fact that there was a Gnostic cult in Ephesus that celebrated the woman as the hero because she sought wisdom by eating the forbiden fruit which brought knowledge into the world (Kroeger, I Suffer Not a Woman" 1992, p87-98).

Note that Paul was not saying that only women are decieved since he uses Eve as a warning to ALL the Corinthian church to be on guard against deception (2 Cor 11:3). Instead, it appears that Paul was simply refuting the idea that woman was superior to man because she sought wisdom.

Are women redeemed by the blood of Christ today?------------

To think that our Sprituality would be bound by the sins of Adam and Eve flies in the face of our new birth theology.

After all, are we still bound by our sins (or anothers) after the cross? If we have truly been set free, then why must we carry Eve upon our backs? Are we new creatures in Christ or not?

I believe Paul would be shocked to see how his prohibition against inexperienced and/or dominating women teaching, got translated into the idea that all women were prohibited from ministering otherwise.

As I have mentioned in other posts; the only Gentile that we know of that was a minister, was mentored directly by Paul and probably traveled with him for some time before he was put into leadership.

Paul said to let the woman learn; which suggests that she may not have been experienced or grounded enough to teach in the first place.

Likewise he said that that the woman should not usurp authority over the man. But let's face it. Men should not usurp (take by force) authority either.

God should be in charge, no matter which vessel He chooses to work through. His Word should always be the ultimate authority no matter whose voice speaks it.

[ThirdGeneration]

Originally posted by Sarte
I say again, Old Greek had three genders: masculine, feminine, and neuter. Because the word for man/husband anêr is masculine in gender, any adjective modifying the word must be in the masculine gender as is the word heis. Likewise, the same is true for the word for wife/woman gunê; it must take the feminine gender and cannot take the masculine in order to be grammatically correct.

A bishop then must be blameless, the HUSBAND OF ONE WIFE, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach...« (1Ti 3:2, KJV)

Let not a widow be taken into the number under threescore years old, having been the WIFE OF ONE MAN...« (1Ti 5:9, KJV)

It appears, Third, that it is you that is in error. You wish to discredit all Greek grammar with a LOL. Hardly. Besides, as you told another, "Wishing to discredit the poster adds nothing to your case."

You need a Greek grammar 101 refresher course. You miss the entire point of the statement.
Sarte- Although you are repeating the first sentence; the rest of the post is new and not what I had objected to.

I have never attempted to say that "wife of one man" was not there. What I showed for that chapter was that "Any man" was actually better translated as "whoever."

Incidently, I had also pointed out that the Ten Commandments likewise referred to not coveting thy neighbor's wife, but we nevertheless, still found them applicable to women.

The discussion IHS and I were having when you posted was about the gender neutrality in the 12th chapter of 1 Corinthians, the 12th chapter of Romans, and the 4th chapter of Ephesians.

Btw- I am in no way attempting to "discredit Greek grammar." I am only pointing out that our English translation does not fully express the gender neutrality of the underlying Greek text. Most people have no idea that this is so.

[ThirdGeneration]

IHS- Please read my posts more carefully.

1. I do not believe that the Bible prohibits women from ministering. I suggested that if we did not have an actual example of women in leadership in the NT church it was not that surprising given the dynamics of the day.

I NEVER said, nor will I EVER say that the Word of God has to change as times change! But I do not believe that our traditons and outdated interpretations are written in the same stone.

2. Sarah was the exception, not the rule. Most women would have children very soon after marriage and marriage would happen soon after they became fertile.

3. I never said women in Jewish society were not educated AT ALL nor that they had NO religous training. Instead, I suggested that they did not have the same overall opportunity as men. To suggest otherwise strains credibility. Is this really an argument you want to make?

4. Why do you suggest that I assume that Paul wrote to Jewish churches? He certainly did not! What is your point here?

5. It is my belief that Jesus was the original women's liberator! We are all treasures in earthen vessels. There are none (men or women) that Christ did not die for.

[In His Service]

3rd,
Would you please list the gifts of the spirit and their function?
Thanks
Bro. Timothy

[CRNewton]

Afterall this debate the irrefutable fact remains that no woman is ever found in the NT in the office of the ministry. Debate all you will--but she is simply not there and all these twisted views cannot and will not change that simple fact! Can you read of a woman being one of the twelve apostles? (Matt. 10:2-5). Out of the total fourteen apostles, not a one was a woman. You read of different preachers. There was Apollos (Acts 18), Phillip the evangelist (Acts 21:8), Timothy who was an evangelist (2Tim 4:1-5), etc. Beloved there is not a "Sue the evangelist." In fact, women are expressly forbidden to "preach." Hear the scriptures: "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence" (I Tim. 2:12).

God’s place for women does not render her inferior as some seem to indicate that submission is. Women do have a valuable part in spreading the gospel (Acts 18:26). Women cannot be praised enough, however, they have no authority for occupying pulpits! NONE!

[ThirdGeneration]

CRNewton- There were NO Gentiles among the Apostles. Likewise all of the apostles wore beards and robes. None drove cars. So what?

Satan used Scripture to tempt Jesus. But Jesus answered back with Scripture that was more applicable to the situation at hand. And so shall I....

If God did not mean for women to minister in particular capacities; then why would He gift them so? For they actually stand in condemnation if they do not use what God gave them.

What did Jesus say?----------------------------------------

14 For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods. 15 And unto one he gave five talents, F49 to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey. 16 Then he that had received the five talents went and traded with the same, and made them other five talents. 17 And likewise he that had received two, he also gained other two. 18 But he that had received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord's money. 19 After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them. 20 And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more. 21 His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord. 22 He also that had received two talents came and said, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me two talents: behold, I have gained two other talents beside them. 23 His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord. 24 Then he which had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed: 25 And I was afraid, and went and hid thy talent in the earth: lo, there thou hast that is thine. 26 His lord answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed: 27 Thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the exchangers, and then at my coming I should have received mine own with usury. 28 Take therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him which hath ten talents. 29 For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath. 30 And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth (Matthew 25:14-30).

What did Peter who had been given the keys to the kingdom of Heaven say?---------------------------------------------

10 As every man [#1538 EACH] hath received the gift, even so MINISTER the same one to another, as GOOD STEWARDS [remember the parable Jesus told?] of the manifold grace of God. 11 If any man [#1536 WHOEVER] speak, let him* speak as the oracles of God; if any man [#1536 WHOEVER] MINISTER, let him* do it AS OF THE ABILITY WHICH GOD GIVETH; that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom the praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen (1 Peter 4:10-11).

What did Paul say?-----------------------------------------------

Whereof I was made a MINISTER according to the gift of grace of God, given unto me by the effectual working of his power (Ephesians 3:7).

7 But unto everyone of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ. 8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive and gave gifts unto men [#444 humanbeings] (Ephesians 4:7-8).

11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers (Ephesians 4:11).

6 Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophecy according to the proportion of faith; 7 Or ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that teacheth on teaching; 8 Or he that exhrteth, on exhortation: he that giveth with simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence.... (Romans 12:6-8).

But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man [#1538 EACH] to profit withal (I Cor 12:7).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So many opportunities to point out gender restrictions and yet we don't find in these passages that were directed to the followers of Jesus, the NT priesthood, and the churches that Paul wrote to as congregations.

Hmm.....

Maybe its time to let go of the tradtions of man.

[ThirdGeneration]

IHS- Paul called his own ministry a gift from God. I have pretty well shown that God expects us to use whatever gifts he gives us.

I have a heavy work schedule over the next few weeks. So feel free to lay out your own ideas (hopefully supported by Scripture as I do). :)

[Nawbee]

Matthew 28:5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.

6 He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. 7 And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you.

8 And they departed quickly from the sepulcher with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word.

9 And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshiped him.

10 Then said Jesus unto them, Be not afraid: go tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me.

Here is Jesus Giving the first Commandment to members of the brand new New Testament church.

He Commands women to go to the eleven. This makes the women Apostles.

He Gives them Words by which they will INSTRUCT the men.

That made them teachers.

They made the announcement to a group of men, that made them preachers.

So, gents, deny, deny, deny, all that the patients of the saints will allow and you cannot defeat the first Act of Jesus Christ to Establish His church.

Proving to those with eyes to see and ears to hear that once and for always:

Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

I have already posted this. It doesn't surprise me at all that some simply ignored it. To address it at all will prove their ignorance of the Power of God and willfull denial of reality as presented in the Word of God.

What other proof does any reasonable person need that women are to have the same offices open to them as men, than that the newly resurrected Jesus sends women (and this is the requirement to be an Apostle) to instruct the eleven?

What other proof than that the first members of the church were the women whom Jesus sent to instruct men who didn't believe them? What other lesson than the faith of the women who believed and obeyed as contrasted by the men who were faithless and did not obey until Jesus appeared to them?

As for a New Testament priesthood made up solely of men, Peter had this to say:

1 Peter 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should show forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvelous light: 10 Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.

Not only a new priesthood made royal that now accepted Gentiles into the fold, but all people, women included.

As for the documents that back up my claim that Paul was speaking of women not shouting across aisles, that came from letters of the time stating such. Not biblical documents but historical.

Now, they will cry foul and disclaim these documents unseen and of course with no more proof than their own prejudices. There argument will go something like, "We don't accept the truth that these documents prove so the documents can't be true."

I will not dig them up. I will let my yea be yea and my nay be nay.

This info is out there and is verifiable to those who seek them. However, to those who know how to listen to God, this will not be necessary. They, like I, will know the Truth because He will have Told them Himself that a woman owes loyalty to only two men in her life and in this order: Jesus and then her husband.

The husband does not own a woman so she cannot be his "treasure". A man can treasure a woman but she can NEVER be his treasure. She was Bought by the blood of God in Jesus Christ.

In conclusion, God has this Word about the women He has Cleansed and Called to minister His Word:

Acts 11:9 But the voice answered me again from heaven, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

[Oldpreach]

Third , Thnk you , and i will re-read what you reposted :) Tho , i will say that at this point , there is perhaps an emense gulf between us on this issue that cannot be bridged. My one great desire is that the folks on your side would be more willing to read the teachings of folks that are not on your side. I remember you (i believe) telling me you had not interest in reading a book that i recommended by Bro. Larry Booker. I feel strongly that part of the problem with "your crowd" for lack of a better term coming to mind ,s that you all have never truly sat under good , God risen and called TEACHERS that are annointed for the Job. I know that you will probably say that you have , but personally , i find that next to impossible to believe. I respect your research and the time you take on it and posting, i really do. I Just know that your premises are faulty.....and if the foundation is cracked then the building is usually tilted and needs to be torn down and re-built. That is what is the case here. I am willing to read anything that you would point to , or , for that matter , even listen to any teacher that you suggest...can you say the same ? :)

Nawbee, you wrote:

"Titus 3:10 A man that is a heretic after the first and second admonition reject; 11 Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself."

Yes , indeed, i reject your heresies...

You wrote "He Commands women to go to the eleven. This makes the women Apostles."

A true heresy...also , your last post contained so many out of context references of scripture its astonishing. Honestly , your last post is very amature. Your just not a good Bible teacher yet. Your being a teacher of things that you dont even understand...just like the Bible says of some.

You need admonishment and folks that arent afraid of you to say that they are directed by the Word of God to stay away from you untill you humble yourself. You are being a truly obnoxious fellow. I personally now will hit the "ignore" button for the first time here.

I suggest that the other Believers here consider what i say of this person...for the sake of his own soul.

[ThirdGeneration]

Old Preach- I do not remember that conversation.

I would be surprized if it was me because I do like to read all sides of an issue. It would be hard to form a thoughtful opinion without carefully considering the various points of view.

Admittedly, I would not want to pay for a book that compares a pastor's authority to that of Moses.... but feel free to send me the book and I will certainly read it, carefully consider it and return it.

Oh.... and what would I have you read and evaluate?

How about my post above? It is in the mouth of two and three witnesses (Matthew, Peter, and Paul). They all suggest the same thing. When God blesses with a gift, a person is responsible to use it for God's glory.

1. Why did Jesus, Peter and Paul fail to mention that some gifts given by the grace of God were just for the men when they taught about these things?

2. Was Paul mistaken when he said we were new creatures in Christ? Are the blood bought, Spirit filled women in the NT church more restrained than OT Deborah?

3. And why does God bless some women with these gifts if they are not to use them?

4. Do you have any idea how many of the large churches (more than a 1000 people) were actually very little churches ORIGINALLY started by women more than 50 years ago? I think the statistics would astound some.... Can a bad tree bring forth good fruit?

In fact, I will go out on a limb here. But if memory serves me right.... Bro. Haney's church in California may be one of them. You know- the church that produced the head guy for the UPC.

Hmm....

[Nawbee]

Oldpreach:
I feel strongly that part of the problem with "your crowd" for lack of a better term coming to mind ,s that you all have never truly sat under good , God risen and called TEACHERS that are annointed for the Job.

Bro. John:
1 John 2:26 These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you.

27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

28 And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming.

29 If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that every one that doeth righteousness is born of him.

[In His Service]

3rd,
So do you agree with newbee that there where women apostles? I would hope that you might reply. If you do agree with her then you would have to go out of the Word of God. The reasoning behing newbees logic would have made most anyone an apostle. Seems that Paul didn't refer to those women apostles nor do we read anywhere in scriptures that calls them such.

I too have a busy week or so ahead with special services coming for our church and such so if I am not on this thread I will get back to it more the week after. I do want to post a little on the thread by Bro. Blume if possible so we will dig a little deeper here as we can, ok.

Praying that we will come closer together in the Word,
Bro. Timothy

[ThirdGeneration]

IHS- Why do you assume Nawbee is a she? :eek:

[In His Service]

3rd,
Newbee used "gents" when referring to the posters. There have been ladies that have replied also. Have not seen many "Gents" uses "Gents" when speaking to men. Maybe newbee is a male, maybe female. I do not know them. They don't sign either way. Regardless it does not matter, male or female, only that he/she needs to stay in the Word of God.

Would you like to answer the question from my post, or only skip that part and ask about the gender of the other poster? Do you agree with newbee that the ladies where apostles?

Waiting for your answer,
Bro. timothy

[Bro.Steingass]

How about those Cubs?


See....Cubs....not an evil, gender-specific team name. If They were Deer, they couldn't be called the Bucks......nooo....too gender specific, not Does either. But Deer. The Minneapolis Deer. Boy that'd look good on a Baseball card.

But what would their mascot be?? A Venison steak?