End Time Army of Women Preachers Psalms 68:11 - Page 171

Roxanne Murphy · #**1701** 02-24-2014, 02:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RJR

They sure did, Sis Alvear. Did you notice the men SERVED (diakoneō) tables? That is the same word used for what the women did in Luke 8:3 (diakoneō) of their substance. The men were not over preaching tables neither was the women preaching their substance. The fact is both men and women served and both were noteworthy in that their names were given. One can serve and be a fellow laborer without being a preacher.

So back again to the subject, there was no female priest in OT, no female apostle chosen by Christ, no qualifications for a female deacon, no qualifications for a female bishop, the woman and not the man was forbidden to teach in the church, was to forbidden to exercise authority over the man.

John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne; And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father ; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen. (Revelation 1:4-6 KJV)

And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation; And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth. (Revelation 5:9, 10)

Very interesting that these passages that show us a glimpse of the great multitude of the redeemed in heaven, comprised of male and female, talks of being made 'kings and priests' (both governing and spiritual authority), and they say that they will reign on the earth. This really cannot happen if no woman is supposed to have any kind of authority over any man (per the interpretation of the scripture that gets taken out of context from the marriage relationship and forced it onto the body of Christ carte Blanche). According to those folks, these scriptures should say that the men will go be kings and priests and rule on the earth but the women will stay in heaven.

rdp · #**1702** 02-24-2014, 02:15 AM

God and Father are nouns. They are not synonyms. Teach and Preach are nouns. They are not synonyms.

Yes, teach & preach are being used interchangeably - & they are only nouns when not in the participial moods (or discussing office) - otherwise they're mostly verbs.

Since I never said the word used in 1Cor 14:35 was Kai, this is meaningless. In fact you are obfuscating the fact we are discussing a completely different verse AND grammar where two nouns are joined by "and". Also the two words are connected because Jesus (a person) was doing BOTH.

LOL - Nice try Prax - not "obfuscating" anything. Simply making an incidental observation - which you do alllll the time ! You are being inconsistent in your conjunction appeals - point stands despite your erroneous charges.

If I said RDP went Fishing and Skiing it doesn't mean "RDP went fishing and fishing"...it's absurd to argue the words are being used as synonyms there. That's redundant.

Ummm, lil' problem there - fishing & skiing describe two entirely separated actions - whereas "preaching" & "teaching" describe a similar action (called a "hendiadys" in grammar).

Unless, again, you're going to tell us that when a man is "teaching" he has ceased "preaching" ? "Absurd" indeed !

They aren't synonyms. If they were. You seem to be confusing "synonyms" with words being used synonymously for the same person. Like Jesus is The Son and the Lamb, those are not synonyms but both refer synonymously to Jesus. But when in the same sentence it doesn't make sense that the author redundantly uses to different words to refer to the same action.

"Teaching" & "Preaching" are used interchangeably in Scripture - & the clear examples will not disappear simply because you stubbornly deny them !

No I said because the two words are used in the same sentence separated by AND that it would be redundant to say they are synonyms. You really believe he meant Jesus was "Teaching and teaching" or "Preaching and Preaching" or instead of God the Father it could read "Father the Father"?

They are used "interchangeably" - you "really believe" that when a man is "preaching" he has ceased "teaching" & vice-versa??

Father and God don't overlap nor do they in Greek. They aren't synonyms. You are again confusing two words being synonyms and two words that can refer to the same PERSON. OPs often do it when they explain their idea of the Godhead. "Im a father and Im a son" but that does not make Father and Son SYNONYMS lol

Ummm, say what ? Contrare' Monfrare - Often Paul would reference "God" & be talking about the Father. In fact, oft times the term used for the Father in the NT is the noun "Theos" (God). You are simply wrong.

And, How on earth do we go from discussing terms that are clearly used interchangeably such as "God" & "Father" to discussing terms that are NOT used interchangeably - such as "Father" & "Son"?? You are making absolutely no sense now.

Praxeas · #**1703** 02-24-2014, 02:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdp

You might. You were the one insisting it as to be one way only. Clearly it can be connective.

Ahhh, so now you've demoted the conjunction from a definite "connective" to "can be" a connective ! Keep this up & you'll eventually land where the biblical text does !

You're confused again. I ARGUED that in the verse in question it's a connective. I never asserted "de" can only be connective. Wow...

Zodhiates says: "but more frequently denoting transition or conversion, and serving to introduce something else" - Kinda' minimizing his "more frequent" data aren't you ?

You're obfuscating the point I made. I never asserted it can ONLY be connective

No, he isn't.

Ummm, yes he is !

Nope

Yeah I can't copy and paste everything either so here is a screen shot.

Yea' - & apparently you missed the portion about "then" & "on the other hand" in your "screen-shot." You can deny the lexical data that I specifically quoted earlier - but this particular conjunction is most often translated as "moreover" or "Now".

No it says "Logical Connective". You are confusing what you see. You are looking at the links to the Lexicons that give a brief description of the word and how it CAN be translated. But the Aparatus labels it a connective.

The evidence I presented says when it's a connective with the idea of explaining the word AND is used or the word is just not translated at all. So apparently the translation you questioned that said "AND" is asserting it's connective and explaining as are several other translations I can list.

So again the point is when you argue "it's X", I have my own sources that say it's not

And, of course this conjunction can denote a continuation (though kai is most often used when this is the case) - And?? What's your point? I know that! Paul is continuing his statement in v. 34 by appending another thought "on top of" v. 35...that's my whole point ??

No...let me quote it again

When a simple connective is desired, without contrast being clearly implied, ‘and’ will suffice, and in certain occurrences the marker may be left untranslated

Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed.) (213). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Sometimes De can be uses in explanatory clauses

2. copulative,
a. in explanatory clauses, ξυνέβησαν .. τὰ μακρὰ τείχη ἑλεῖν (ἦν δὲ σταδίων μάλιστα ὀκτώ) Th.4.66, cf. Il.7.48: when a Subst. is folld. by words in apposition, Ἀρισταγόρῃ τῷ Μιλησίῳ, δούλῳ δὲ ἡμετέρῳ Hdt.7.8.β ́; μήτηρ βασιλέως βασίλεια δʼ ἐμή A.Pers.152; so in answers, διπλᾶ λέγειν.—Answ. διπλᾶ δʼ ὁρᾶν Id.Th.974.

Liddell, H. G., Scott, R., Jones, H. S., & McKenzie, R. (1996). A Greek-English lexicon (371). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

1161. δέ dĕ, deh; a prim. particle (adversative or continuative); but, and, etc.:—also, and, but, moreover, now [often unexpressed in English].

Strong, J. (2009). Vol. 1: A Concise Dictionary of the Words in the Greek Testament and The Hebrew Bible (21). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.

The context clearly is Paul continuing to explain what was said before

de: but, and, now, (a connective or adversative particle)
Original Word: δέ
Part of Speech: Conjunction
Transliteration: de
Phonetic Spelling: (deh)
Short Definition: but, on the other hand, and
Definition: a weak adversative particle, generally placed second in its clause; but, on the other hand, and.

HELPS Word-studies: 1161 dé (a conjunction) – moreover, indeed now . . . , on top of this . . . , next . . .

AND and also often not translated. BTW what's between the dots?

See here: http://biblehub.com/greek/1161.htm.

I'll stick to what I have on my Logos

Praxeas · #**1704** 02-24-2014, 02:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdp

God and Father are nouns. They are not synonyms. Teach and Preach are nouns. They are not synonyms.

Yes, teach & preach are being used interchangeably - & they are only nouns when not in the participial moods (or discussing office) - otherwise they're mostly verbs.

What makes you think that saying "teach and preach" means the words are being used interchangeably? Isn't that redundant? Teach and Teach..Preach and Preach..

Since I never said the word used in 1Cor 14:35 was Kai, this is meaningless. In fact you are obfuscating the fact we are discussing a completely different verse AND grammar where two nouns are joined by "and". Also the two words are connected because Jesus (a person) was doing BOTH.

LOL - Nice try Prax - not "obfuscating" anything. Simply making an incidental observation - which you do alllll the time ! You are being inconsistent in your conjunction appeals - point stands despite your erroneous charges.

No, I am not. The grammar is completely different as is the context

If I said RDP went Fishing and Skiing it doesn't mean "RDP went fishing and fishing"...it's absurd to argue the words are being used as synonyms there. That's redundant.

Ummm, lil' problem there - fishing & skiing describe two entirely separated actions - whereas "preaching" & "teaching" describe a similar action (called a "hendiadys" in grammar).

Exactly. Two separate actions. As are teach and Preach. BTW you just said "describes a similar action"...seems you just changed your argument from being SYNONYMOUS to merely being similar

Unless, again, you're going to tell us that when a man is "teaching" he has ceased "preaching" ? "Absurd" indeed !

Jesus was doing both according to the text, he was teaching AND preaching. So he did not cease, he did both

They aren't synonyms. If they were. You seem to be confusing "synonyms" with words being used synonymously for the same person. Like Jesus is The Son and the Lamb, those are not synonyms but both refer synonymously to Jesus. But when in the same sentence it doesn't make sense that the author redundantly uses to different words to refer to the same action.

"Teaching" & "Preaching" are used interchangeably in Scripture - & the clear examples will not disappear simply because you stubbornly deny them !

Im still waiting for that example. BTW are they interchangeable or are they merely similar?

No I said because the two words are used in the same sentence separated by AND that it would be redundant to say they are synonyms. You really believe he meant Jesus was "Teaching and teaching" or "Preaching and Preaching" or instead of God the Father it could read "Father the Father"?

They are used "interchangeably" - you "really believe" that when a man is "preaching" he has ceased "teaching" & vice-versa??

Really? You got one string left on that guitar so you're gonna just keep on beating it eh?

Interchangeable or just similar?

Father and God don't overlap nor do they in Greek. They aren't synonyms. You are again confusing two words being synonyms and two words that can refer to the same PERSON. OPs often do it when they explain their idea of the Godhead. "Im a father and Im a son" but that does not make Father and Son SYNONYMS lol

Ummm, say what ? Contrare' Monfrare - Often Paul would reference "God" & be talking about the Father. In fact, oft times the term used for the Father in the NT is the noun "Theos" (God). You are simply wrong.

Exactly...talking about the SAME person by using two different words to DESCRIBE Him. BTW don't confuse circumlocutions with words that are synonyms either. They are still not synonyms. He isn't just our God, He is our Father, He is our Lord. These all describe DIFFERENT aspects of the same being

And, How on earth do we go from discussing terms that are clearly used interchangeably such as "God" & "Father" to discussing terms that are NOT used interchangeably - such as "Father" & "Son"?? You are making absolutely no sense now.

Because you gave an example where you claim Teach and Preach and Father and God are synonyms and Im still trying to figure out how you get synonyms out of "God and Father"..when you don't get them out of "Father and Son". You seem to be just assuming they are synonyms

BTW
Interchangeable or just similar?

rdp · #**1705** 02-24-2014, 02:36 AM

No it says "Logical Connective". You are confusing what you see. You are looking at the links to the Lexicons that give a brief description of the word and how it CAN be translated. But the Aparatus labels it a connective.

And YOU are denying what you DO see . Here, let's try it again: "moreover, indeed now . . . , on top of this . . . , next" (there's absolutely nothing in the ellipsis above - just the way they put it). I am not "confusing" anything - I read it just fine (as I already explained).

The evidence I presented says when it's a connective with the idea of explaining the word AND is used or the word is just not translated at all. So apparently the translation you questioned that said "AND" is asserting it's connective and explaining as are several other translations I can list.

So? What's your point? I can list just as many translations as you can? Paul is clearly appending another thought "on top of" his thought in v. 34 - deny it until doomsday - it will still be there when you're finished !

So again the point is when you argue "it's X", I have my own sources that say it's not.

And I have my own grammatical sources (as well as your own ) that equally say it IS - Now what?

When a simple connective is desired, without contrast being clearly implied, ‘and’ will suffice, and in certain occurrences the marker may be left untranslated.

And then there is the source I quoted which specifically stated that this term is best translated as "Moreover" - not to re-mention how the NASB translates the conjunction. Or, how about we revisit your own source from Zodhiates - who says that most frequently the conjunction introduces a new thing!? Amazing how you can't (or won't) see this ?

2. copulative,
a. in explanatory clauses, ξυνέβησαν .. τὰ μακρὰ τείχη ἑλεῖν (ἦν δὲ σταδίων μάλιστα ὀκτώ) Th.4.66, cf. Il.7.48: when a Subst. is folld. by words in apposition, Ἀρισταγόρῃ τῷ Μιλησίῳ, δούλῳ δὲ ἡμετέρῳ Hdt.7.8.β ́; μήτηρ βασιλέως βασίλεια δʼ ἐμή A.Pers.152; so in answers, διπλᾶ λέγειν.—Answ. διπλᾶ δʼ ὁρᾶν Id.Th.974.

Liddell, H. G., Scott, R., Jones, H. S., & McKenzie, R. (1996). A Greek-English lexicon (371). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Hmmm, wonder what the other definition Liddell & Scott gave (noticed that you only appealed to the "copulative" force - hmmmm)? And, even the copulative carries the meaning of "moreover" or "on top of" which is my whole point!

1161. δέ dĕ, deh; a prim. particle (adversative or continuative); but, and, etc.:—also, and, but, moreover, now [often unexpressed in English].

Hmmmmm .

Strong, J. (2009). Vol. 1: A Concise Dictionary of the Words in the Greek Testament and The Hebrew Bible (21). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.

The context clearly is Paul continuing to explain what was said before.

Yes, & in doing so he appends another thought onto his previous thought in v. 34 as evidenced by his usage of this conjunction ! Exactly the point!

Nope

Yep & the grammar of the text says so (even your own source) - you just don't like it!

I'll stick to what I have on my Logos.

Yea' - Imagine that !

rdp · #**1706** 02-24-2014, 02:58 AM

Jesus was doing both according to the text, he was teaching AND preaching. So he did not cease, he did both.

LOL - Precisely the point! He did not cease doing one while He was doing them other. Or, did He say, "Wait, now, I've got to make a switch over from one to the other" ? Absurd.

BTW you just said "describes a similar action"...seems you just changed your argument from being SYNONYMOUS to merely being similar.

Ummm, what on earth do you think the terms "similar" & "synonymous" (& "interchangeable") mean? LOL.

syn·on·y·mous
səˈnänəməs/
adjective
adjective: synonymous

1. (of a word or phrase) having the same or nearly the same meaning as another word or phrase in the same language.
Example: "aggression is often taken as synonymous with violence"

2. closely associated with or suggestive of something.
Example: "his deeds had made his name synonymous with victory"

This has been my whole point - preaching & teaching are often used interchangeably or synonymously in the Bible - & you've been shown this over & over. But, typical Prax, he tampers with it until it no longer means what it clearly indicates - welcome to AFF-proper !

Really? You got one string left on that guitar so you're gonna just keep on beating it eh?

LOL - Watch how easy this is Prax - ready? Just because you feign the high ground of victory in argumentation does not victory make !

Looks like you're the one with the one-string guitar - you've demoted the conjunction de' from a "connective" to, "Well, it 'CAN' include a connective" !

Told you you were sounding more & more like a Trinnie!

Interchangeable or just similar?

Ummm, see above .

Exactly...talking about the SAME person by using two different words to DESCRIBE Him. BTW don't confuse circumlocutions with words that are synonyms either. They are still not synonyms. He isn't just our God, He is our Father, He is our Lord. These all describe DIFFERENT aspects of the same being

Bingo! And, both "teaching" & "preaching" describe distinct aspects of the same action - expounding from God's word (unless you can win the lost by not referencing a biblical text ???)! My whole point! Very good .

Because you gave an example where you claim Teach and Preach and Father and God are synonyms and Im still trying to figure out how you get synonyms out of "God and Father"..when you don't get them out of "Father and Son". You seem to be just assuming they are synonyms.

And I'm still trying to figure out how you can compare apples to oranges with the terms "Father & Son" - which are NOT used interchangeably (well, for the most part) in the Bible - with terms that ARE used interchangeably in the Bible ??

BTW
Interchangeable or just similar?

BTW - Already explained this above (which I should not have to do ).

BTW - "connective" or merely "CAN INCLUDE" connective ?

Typical Praxeas.

shazeep · #**1707** 02-24-2014, 03:29 AM

you continue to make good points, RDP, i must say. i would ask if you feel that the definition of the term Preach has survived intact, as so many of the def's seem to have changed ("hope" etc)--but really, even your antagonists must admit, i think, that they are only nearly synonymous. or was that your adversary saying that? this is getting hard to follow for a drop in...

Quote:

BTW
Interchangeable or just similar?

hmm

Aquila · #**1708** 02-24-2014, 06:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RJR

Act 19:6.. ..And when Paul had laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking in tongues and prophesying.

I suppose you would feel these individuals who had only moments before heard about the Holy Ghost were now speaking in tongues and preaching. Of course it would not be a stretch in many Pentecostal circles, it is the source of many far out ideas that has even surfaced in this thread, such as women elders.

The very night I was baptized, after getting home I preached the Gospel to my extended family.

Aquila · #**1709** 02-24-2014, 06:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RJR

Act 19:6.. ..And when Paul had laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking in tongues and prophesying.

I suppose you would feel these individuals who had only moments before heard about the Holy Ghost were now speaking in tongues and preaching. Of course it would not be a stretch in many Pentecostal circles, it is the source of many far out ideas that has even surfaced in this thread, such as women elders.

Most Pentecostals wouldn't let new converts "prophesy" in any form of preaching either. That's why... I'm simple church guy.

Aquila · #**1710** 02-24-2014, 06:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RJR

[COLOR=Red]

1Ti 5:14.. ..I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully

I am stunned you all keep saying that 1 Tim 2 refers to the women keeping silence in the home and learning with all subjection, and yet 1 Cor. 14:35 states that is where they are to ask their husbands FOR IT A SHAME FOR THEM TO SPEAK IN THE CHURCH! Obviously the exceptions are praying, prophesying and praising in the church. The prohibition is teaching and usurping authority. If you object to this it is you objecting to Bible language and your misunderstanding is with Biblical terms!.

Obviously the term "speak" means to talk and talk and never shut up to the point that the women are interrupting the very flow of the gathering. Else... there wouldn't be "exceptions" as you put it.

Quote:

Prophesying is a gift of the Spirit and is not preaching. It is impossible to preach without exercising some authority. Preaching in 2Tim.4, reproves, rebukes and exhorts.

"Preaching" is a general term for a NT message, or proclamation, that may include any or all of the following:

Prophesy
Teaching
Admonition
Rebuke
Exhortation
Testimony

I do believe that it may not be wise for a woman to offer "rebuke" or "admonish" in her preaching, unless it is towards the women. Most men wouldn't take such a thing well. Most women preachers that I've known are very cautious not to offend the brethren and do well to stay on their message.