Women cannot have authority in the congregation.
- Thread starter JohnPost1
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
S
Her spirit of divination was a demon that knew certain things that was not obvious to other people. The example given of this spirit in operation was knowing who Paul and his team were... “These men are servants of the Most High God, who proclaim to you the way of salvation.” Therefore we know how she made her masters money. She knew things that others did not. This is not telling peoples fortune but it makes people believe she can. They probably came with questions and she wowed them with some information she knew that they wondered how she could possible know that. This gave her the common name of fortune teller or sooth sayer or one who has a spirit of divination. Sticking to the example given in the text we do not see her actually having the ability to declare what is going to happen in the future because only GOD can do that Isaiah 41. There is nothing in the text about demons having the ability to see the future all laid out in the spiritual realm
and that kind of talk should be retired and not resurrected in the near future. I am glad we had this talk.
and that kind of talk should be retired and not resurrected in the near future. I am glad we had this talk. -
1
- Show all
Her spirit of divination was a demon that knew certain things that was not obvious to other people. The example given of this spirit in operation was knowing who Paul and his team were... “These men are servants of the Most High God, who proclaim to you the way of salvation.” Therefore we know how she made her masters money. She knew things that others did not. This is not telling peoples fortune but it makes people believe she can. They probably came with questions and she wowed them with some information she knew that they wondered how she could possible know that. This gave her the common name of fortune teller or sooth sayer or one who has a spirit of divination. Sticking to the example given in the text we do not see her actually having the ability to declare what is going to happen in the future because only GOD can do that Isaiah 41. There is nothing in the text about demons having the ability to see the future all laid out in the spiritual realm and that kind of talk should be retired and not resurrected in the near future. I am glad we had this talk.
and that kind of talk should be retired and not resurrected in the near future. I am glad we had this talk.
-
1
- Show all
One is sincerely wrong.. And is not being guided by the Holy Spirit on the matter but has either come to his own conclusion or has been indoctrinated by his denomination, parents or preacher on the matter..
If you are guided by the Holy Spirit and we pray for the truth to be revealed to us then it will..
It is not a problem if the ones guided by the Holy Spirit have the correct answer..
Also i would like to put in a distinction between a core doctrine of salvational importance and a side doctrine of no doctrinal importance.. You can have three Christians with three different interpretations on a doctrine and all three can be saved.. for example the doctrine of rapture.. The first person does not believe in rapture.. The second person believes in pre-tribulation rapture and the last person believed in a post - tribulation rapture.. The salvational status of these three has no bearing on their salvation status with God.. While you can have 3 different beliefs in regard to the resurrection of the LORD Jesus Christ.. The first person may believe that Jesus did not rise from the dead.. The second person believes Jesus did rise from the dead but as a Ghost not a physical resurrection and the third person believes Jesus was physically raised from the dead. In this case the answer does have salvational importance and only one of the three is saved.. The one who believes Jesus was raised from the dead physically..
If one is guided by the Holy Spirit one will be caused to know who is correct.. If indeed it is vitally important to ones salvation..
The Holy Spirit is not revealing truth to all three if their doctrines are contradictory..
If you are guided by the Holy Spirit and we pray for the truth to be revealed to us then it will..
It is not a problem if the ones guided by the Holy Spirit have the correct answer..
Also i would like to put in a distinction between a core doctrine of salvational importance and a side doctrine of no doctrinal importance.. You can have three Christians with three different interpretations on a doctrine and all three can be saved.. for example the doctrine of rapture.. The first person does not believe in rapture.. The second person believes in pre-tribulation rapture and the last person believed in a post - tribulation rapture.. The salvational status of these three has no bearing on their salvation status with God.. While you can have 3 different beliefs in regard to the resurrection of the LORD Jesus Christ.. The first person may believe that Jesus did not rise from the dead.. The second person believes Jesus did rise from the dead but as a Ghost not a physical resurrection and the third person believes Jesus was physically raised from the dead. In this case the answer does have salvational importance and only one of the three is saved.. The one who believes Jesus was raised from the dead physically..
If one is guided by the Holy Spirit one will be caused to know who is correct.. If indeed it is vitally important to ones salvation..
The Holy Spirit is not revealing truth to all three if their doctrines are contradictory..
G
I would like to see this "evidence"! What evidence proves the history of creation? What is the story of Noah's Ark? What evidence proves the miracles Jesus did?
The text was written much later, as you say yourself. As an author, I know how often a text is changed. From the first to the last version, a text goes through several stages. In addition, the stories were mostly handed down orally at that time, since much of the story may have been changed until it was written down for the first time. No proof of your thesis.
Apparently you never dealt with the creation of ancient writings, otherwise you would not argue so naively.
Take Paul's statement that women should remain silent in the church. This statement, for example, was written about 100 to 150 years after the death of the apostle, according to Bible scholars. Presumably to push back women in ecclesiastical offices.
There are two major problems with the Bible:
1. Incorrect translations.
2. Later insets.
Therefore, one should not believe everything in the Bible, but first examine it.
The text was written much later, as you say yourself. As an author, I know how often a text is changed. From the first to the last version, a text goes through several stages. In addition, the stories were mostly handed down orally at that time, since much of the story may have been changed until it was written down for the first time. No proof of your thesis.
Apparently you never dealt with the creation of ancient writings, otherwise you would not argue so naively.
Take Paul's statement that women should remain silent in the church. This statement, for example, was written about 100 to 150 years after the death of the apostle, according to Bible scholars. Presumably to push back women in ecclesiastical offices.
There are two major problems with the Bible:
1. Incorrect translations.
2. Later insets.
Therefore, one should not believe everything in the Bible, but first examine it.
You're going in circles. Scribe did an excellent job of laying out the problem with your view, and all you have done is reiterated it.
The needle is stuck. It's time to rethink your position.
Obviously the Holy Spirit is not telling three people three contradictory things. The problem is that, if all three rely solely on "the Holy Spirit" to teach them, none of the three can logically hold the others to be in error without also being held in error by the others. In other words, they could all be wrong, and none would know it.
None of the three has any objective claim to the true interpretation, but all think that they do.
The needle is stuck. It's time to rethink your position.
Obviously the Holy Spirit is not telling three people three contradictory things. The problem is that, if all three rely solely on "the Holy Spirit" to teach them, none of the three can logically hold the others to be in error without also being held in error by the others. In other words, they could all be wrong, and none would know it.
None of the three has any objective claim to the true interpretation, but all think that they do.
L
lenna, you’re being too sensitive and defensive. People can post what they think or believe.
Why consistently attack my posts as if they are attacking you. I’m not attacking you, I’m simply posting what I think - nothing wrong with that.
Why consistently attack my posts as if they are attacking you. I’m not attacking you, I’m simply posting what I think - nothing wrong with that.
I guess you thought everyone would be impressed by your religiosity but that didn't work out
you don't really believe people can post whatever they want and you illustrated that for us by your attacks on several of us
you are just plain out not being truthful and that has nothing to do with me or anyone else here.
G
Let us take as an example the topic of homosexuality in the Bible. Does the Bible really condemn homosexuality, as some Christians claim, or is there perhaps something completely different behind it? Did the Bible know homosexual love relations, or perhaps does the Bible condemn anything different from homosexuality?
If there is interest, I would like to explore this question with you in another thread. Believe me, I have gained insights from the text of the Bible, the context and the historical context, as well as the language that will blow you all over. In any case, it knocked me over, which I found out.
If there is interest, I would like to explore this question with you in another thread. Believe me, I have gained insights from the text of the Bible, the context and the historical context, as well as the language that will blow you all over. In any case, it knocked me over, which I found out.
S
So pray for the truth to be revealed and then what? Wait for it to come to us while we are in the shower?
What about examining the context of the scripture that is in question to see if a mistake has been made that is obvious? Now that would be the place to start after you have already prayed for guidance, and you do not have a right to skip that rule while saying that the Spirit will show you. because he won't because your being dumb and lazy if you refuse to examine context. Not you personally, I mean anyone.
My example of "As a man thinketh in his heart so is he" I have used in a previous post. Many people are thinking they have the Spirit on that one and they have never examined the context. When they do they realize they made a mistake in interpreting it the way they have been doing. The day they examine the context and get the correct meaning that the Spirit intended all along is the day they were lead by the Spirit. The truth came to them the day they followed the hermeneutic rule of examining context. And not before.
What about examining the context of the scripture that is in question to see if a mistake has been made that is obvious? Now that would be the place to start after you have already prayed for guidance, and you do not have a right to skip that rule while saying that the Spirit will show you. because he won't because your being dumb and lazy if you refuse to examine context.
Not you personally, I mean anyone. My example of "As a man thinketh in his heart so is he" I have used in a previous post. Many people are thinking they have the Spirit on that one and they have never examined the context. When they do they realize they made a mistake in interpreting it the way they have been doing. The day they examine the context and get the correct meaning that the Spirit intended all along is the day they were lead by the Spirit. The truth came to them the day they followed the hermeneutic rule of examining context. And not before.
Adam was never tricked. We know this because the Scripture tells us, "Adam was not deceived". It's found in 1 Tim 2:14.
Adam did try to shirk his responsibility and make excuse for himself, and accuse both God and Eve in the same breath "the woman YOU gave me". It seems that you agree with Adam's excuse when it comes to Eve. Would you agree with Adam that God is also to blame for the situation in the world?
Adam did try to shirk his responsibility and make excuse for himself, and accuse both God and Eve in the same breath "the woman YOU gave me". It seems that you agree with Adam's excuse when it comes to Eve. Would you agree with Adam that God is also to blame for the situation in the world?
Well, then it will be difficult for you to find God. What you then search on an Christian forum? Faith is no Fiction. You need faith in your normal life. You need faith in a relationship and you need faith when you open a tin of Coca Cola, that there is Coca Cola inside.
Read ore hear Werner Gitt, he is giving you facts. You can easly Google him., if your Goal is to find the truth.
Read ore hear Werner Gitt, he is giving you facts. You can easly Google him., if your Goal is to find the truth.
It would appear that (a) you have never properly read or studied the Bible, or (b) you have chosen to skip the passages which deal with homosexuality, or (c) you don't really care what the Bible says, as long as the LGBTQ agenda can do forward (as does the rainbow flag crowd).
Not only does the Bible strongly condemn homosexuality, but the Bible gives us the example of Sodom and Gomorrah as the epitome of sexual deviance, and the extremely severe judgment reserved for perverts -- which is ultimately eternal Hell (the Lake of Fire).
So before you post again, you might want to sit down and carefully study the Bible before you put your foot in your mouth. And just ignore the so-called *scholars* (who themselves need to be schooled).
Not only does the Bible strongly condemn homosexuality, but the Bible gives us the example of Sodom and Gomorrah as the epitome of sexual deviance, and the extremely severe judgment reserved for perverts -- which is ultimately eternal Hell (the Lake of Fire).
So before you post again, you might want to sit down and carefully study the Bible before you put your foot in your mouth. And just ignore the so-called *scholars* (who themselves need to be schooled).
That is so true. Adam was not deceived because God told Adam about the forbidden tree personally. And later, Adam was there when the serpent beguiled Eve so that she would eat what she didn't know was forbidden. And after that Adam ate of the fruit too and knowing what God forewarned about it.
You can't be deceived when you're fully informed of action and consequence beforehand.
I think this is why we're told later on that by one man, Adam, the first Adam, Jesus was the second, sin entered the world. Because Adam was responsible for allowing Eve to eat when he knew better. And he himself ate when he knew better. Adam was suppose to lead Eve unto obedience, or making good choices. He failed right along side her and let her take the first bite of the forbidden fruit. And then knowing what God had said, he took the second bite.
You can't be deceived when you're fully informed of action and consequence beforehand.
I think this is why we're told later on that by one man, Adam, the first Adam, Jesus was the second, sin entered the world. Because Adam was responsible for allowing Eve to eat when he knew better. And he himself ate when he knew better. Adam was suppose to lead Eve unto obedience, or making good choices. He failed right along side her and let her take the first bite of the forbidden fruit. And then knowing what God had said, he took the second bite.
-
1
- Show all
This is why I think people are wrong when they claim God doesn't want women in charge in church.
Because in the beginning a guy was in charge and fully informed about the forbidden tree and yet he failed to take charge , lead by example, and as a consequence the whole future human race was FUBAR. Necessitating God to arrive at a decision to show mercy and in his grace became the second Adam so as to make things aright. Or, save us from our sins that exist due to Adam. Who was solely responsible for sin entering into the world itself.
When a guy couldn't lead so as to keep the world's future people out of the death that sin brings, it is hard to argue a guy has superior authority over any woman to teach the words of God that save us from our sins.God's words, our Biblical new testament, exists because the first guy couldn't obey nor enforce, or lead the only woman in his charge, to obey the simple words of God in the beginning. Thou shalt not eat!
Sin entered the world through one man. I don't think we are able to say a woman can't lead people to repentance of their sins. The guy as head of the family factor in the beginning made this all necessary in the first place.
Because in the beginning a guy was in charge and fully informed about the forbidden tree and yet he failed to take charge , lead by example, and as a consequence the whole future human race was FUBAR. Necessitating God to arrive at a decision to show mercy and in his grace became the second Adam so as to make things aright. Or, save us from our sins that exist due to Adam. Who was solely responsible for sin entering into the world itself.
When a guy couldn't lead so as to keep the world's future people out of the death that sin brings, it is hard to argue a guy has superior authority over any woman to teach the words of God that save us from our sins.God's words, our Biblical new testament, exists because the first guy couldn't obey nor enforce, or lead the only woman in his charge, to obey the simple words of God in the beginning. Thou shalt not eat!
Sin entered the world through one man. I don't think we are able to say a woman can't lead people to repentance of their sins. The guy as head of the family factor in the beginning made this all necessary in the first place.
