Women will be saved through Childbearing, if

There is nothing in the Book of 1st Timothy chapter 3 that says a man must be married so as to qualify for the office of Deacon.

I have found that Deaconess can apply to the wife of a Deacon as well as be a term for a female Deacon.
That excerpt from 1st Timothy informs of the qualifications regarding female Deacons, not Deacon's wives. The context of the article informs of this when it says, 11[h]Women must likewise be
Footnote
[h]I.e. either deacons’ wives or deaconesses

The Book of 1st Timothy chapter 3 does not say that.

Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.
1 Timothy 3:12 KJV

Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.
1 Timothy 3:12 KJV

The KJV isn't the final authority on these matters... or any other.

So you are saying the reader is the final authority? What is the use of God's word?

I'm not getting into a debate over Bible versions in this thread. I said exactly what I meant.

Bible =/= KJV

If you understood then you would see I offered what I consider support from the word of God.

Is this like the Acts 10 where you kept saying it debunks the idea that tongues as prophecy is a sign against those that have no faith coming from prophecy alone.

Where is your support to the effects of the reformation? Why keep changing the subject. Seeing reformations restore. What period was it restored to using Kings as a parable of the time then present?

To the back of the class again? Well I am glad to oblige and bring laughter . I am a slow learner. Thanks to you I have learned a few words .. Which word might that be "circle reasoning" as a law? Or word for word verbatim?

I think it is funny when you avoid talking about subject matter. Especially parables. They seem to get in your way.

Support from the word of God looks like this:

Romans 16:1 I commend to you our sister Phoebe, who is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea.

It does not look like this:

"Like for instance. Verbatim. . I will restore the government of God back to the time period of Judges before the abomination of desolation was permitted because of the jealousy of the faithless Pagan nation ? "

This thread is not about Acts 10, tongues, prophecy, or about the "reformation". It is you who is attempting to change the subject!

Being a slow learner is excusable. Refusing to learn is not. Sticking stubbornly to error when repeatedly corrected is deplorable.

Parables don't get in my way at all. You talking about passages that are not parables as if they are does, however, cross my radar far too frequently.

The Word (John 1:1-1:3) is the final authority. Translations have their shortcomings, as does language itself.

I am of the opinion that the Lord most certainly is aware of the limitations of language and can and does operate within our own understanding to overcome these limitations.

Even plain text can be read differently in a plethora of different ways in our fleshly mind. It is a useful tool certainly, but can experience "glitches".


We see in part. Certainly though we should be able to come to a reasonable consensus on "some" level.


That said, I do appreciate the KJV as a preferred translation but there are times with any translation where a "glitch" in my mind appears to occur and this is usually circumvented by consulting another translation, praying, and looking up the root word, and when that fails...utilizing the body for additional input, bearing in mind that they also have "glitches" and I need to look past them. Some "errors" take me years to see and I attribute this to maturity. As well as that each of us have a unique perspective, and our processes for growth function somewhat differently.


That's the general vibe I get from this thread and something I'm really struggling with as far as why there is so much disagreement that borders on dissention. I can't really see a way to create a thread about this... so maybe off topic, but I'm wondering how many here have direct experience with this issue?

I can theorize and postulate based off imagined scenarios and react to scenarios that others are faced with. I have noticed that while my view may be fully in line with scripture as I understand at my computer desk (or my bed, or in my car) and it seems so clear. When actually faced with this scenario personally (not by proxy) I have to engage it in a way that is impossible to replicate.

It's like some elements of scripture I've learned intellectually but not practically and once they are learned practically it ends up a bit different from what I thought...not too far off base, but more "living".

Even scriptural examples in the Old and New testament are them. They can help me formulate my response...but walking it out it always looks a bit different.



It seems this thread has included a lot of different "threads" and it's hard to react otherwise. Oh and I quoted you b/c of the KJV side trail which is often on my mind, but a lot of this about the general thread. I don't follow all of them, but this one has caught my interest.


Definitely learned a few things and sharpened a bit of my own understanding at least

8 Deacons likewise must be men of dignity, not [e]double-tongued, [f]or addicted to much wine [g]or fond of sordid gain, 9 but holding to the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. 10 These men must also first be tested; then let them serve as deacons if they are beyond reproach. 11 [h]Women must likewise be dignified, not malicious gossips, but temperate, faithful in all things. 12 Deacons must be husbands of only one wife, and [i]good managers of their children and their own households. 13 For those who have served well as deacons obtain for themselves a [j]high standing and great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus.


Women= γυνή (gynē)
Strong: G1135
GK: G1222
a woman, Mt. 5:28, et al.; a married woman, wife, Mt. 5:31, 32; 14:3, et al.; in the voc. ὦ γύναι, O woman! an ordinary mode of addressing females under every circumstance; met. used of the Church, as united to Christ, Rev. 19:7; 21:9

Perhaps you do not belong to a church with apostolic authority. Those that do take this very serious. Perhaps also you are thinking of the elders that are worthy of "double honor" - "The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching." (1Timothy5:17)

Language after the Tower of Babel not before. The Torah was written using the Pure Hebrew Langage.

Apostolic authority? No such thing.

Apostle one sent with the word of God. Was Balaam's donkey an authority. The words of prophecy that came from its mouth did the work of preventing that false apostle Balaam from spreading a false gospel .

The last letter in a word does change the meaning of that word: In this case we see διάκονοι vs διάκονον (diakonon vs diakonos).

You should have respect for the people that do believe in apostolic authority. Otherwise you are creating division in the church.

I know

wasnt' it you that posted about her already? but I actually read one of her books some suns ago