Heavenlyone: I also looked up Vine's definition & I found absolutely nothing in the word "prostatis" denoting a "woman set over others."
Do you have a link for your reference? I do. It's a Greek lexicon. I thought it was a Strong's definition since it uses the numbers, but someone told me a while back that it uses the Vine's definitions.
Succourer, Strong's # 4368, including the best of W.E. Vine's, pg. 215: "A Patroness, Assisstant." Vine's: "Prostatis is the feminine form of 'Prostates' & denotes a PROTECTRESS, a PATRONESS. It is used METAPHORICALLY of Pheobe & is a word of dignity. It indicates the high esteem w/ which she was regarded, AS ONE WHO HAS BEEN A PROTECTRESS of many."
Where's your "woman preacher" in the literal definition:_______________? More blanks unfillable by Joy!
"Gune"? I'm familiar w/ this term, but what does it have to do w/ women preachers? I think I know where you're going w/ this, & am ready to show the fallacy of the logic....w/ all due respect [seriously].
Godsdrummer is soooo silly that I really do not even waste time w/ him. "No Scripture against rings"?????????? Say what? Ever read Is. 3, which details a whole list against ornamentation...then in chp. 4 calls it "filth"! You're problem is that you're a law unto yourself & no one can instruct you...not even God's plainly written Word [which you ironically appeal to].
There were no Chp. divisions originally, & did not begin until the 1300's, thus they have no doctrinal value. Man, you guys really should do more homework. I Tim. 2, etc. stands as a positive witness against your eisegesical speculations of women preachers.
Tks. Simplyme, I, too, appreciate your posts. Blessings...............
rdp, Isaiah 3 goes far deeper than simply being about rings. It talks about their uncaring attitude to the poor. It further condemns them in that attitude by their very own actions of wearing around such unneeded extravagant attire while this is going on. It's as if God is saying, this is the last straw. This passage is a poor illustration of God being angered simply because of our attire.
In regard to Phoebe, I did some reading on her today. While RDP wants to downplay her role in the church as a mere servant or slave, 'patroness' denotes a dignified position, and one of high esteem.
I looked in the Strong's Concordance that I have and also couldn't find the specific definition that she was set over others, as the website I posted states, but I think it's clear that her duties weren't that of a mere servant. She was highly esteemed in that she was looked up to and depended on by others, including Paul.
She was also a protector. This is the crux of the matter. In order to be a protector, she had to be in a leadership position of some kind. Does this mean she preached? I'd never assume that, however, the fact that Paul had to instruct men to obey her tells me that he was aware of the problems she might have had with men who think like RDP.
It's clear that Phoebe taught others and helped them. Her positions that are defined as a succourer indicate that. In order to protect, she had to lead. A shepherd protects his flock, but his flock doesn't lead him. We protect our children, but in doing so, we lead them, they don't lead us.
Phoebe was a woman held in high esteem and dignity. Paul said she was a succourer of many--there is no other person, man or woman, given this title by Paul in the Bible.
Now, I will save her title as deaconess for another post on another date...
__________________
I've gone and done it now! I'm on Facebook!!!
Succourer, Strong's # 4368, including the best of W.E. Vine's, pg. 215: "A Patroness, Assisstant." Vine's: "Prostatis is the feminine form of 'Prostates' & denotes a PROTECTRESS, a PATRONESS. It is used METAPHORICALLY of Pheobe & is a word of dignity. It indicates the high esteem w/ which she was regarded, AS ONE WHO HAS BEEN A PROTECTRESS of many."
Where's your "woman preacher" in the literal definition:_______________? More blanks unfillable by Joy!
"Gune"? I'm familiar w/ this term, but what does it have to do w/ women preachers? I think I know where you're going w/ this, & am ready to show the fallacy of the logic....w/ all due respect [seriously].
Godsdrummer is soooo silly that I really do not even waste time w/ him. "No Scripture against rings"?????????? Say what? Ever read Is. 3, which details a whole list against ornamentation...then in chp. 4 calls it "filth"! You're problem is that you're a law unto yourself & no one can instruct you...not even God's plainly written Word [which you ironically appeal to].
There were no Chp. divisions originally, & did not begin until the 1300's, thus they have no doctrinal value. Man, you guys really should do more homework. I Tim. 2, etc. stands as a positive witness against your eisegesical speculations of women preachers.
Tks. Simplyme, I, too, appreciate your posts. Blessings...............
Sorry. I didn't see your post until after I posted, but you are right on the definition. I got the same thing from my Strong's. I'm still trying to find out what reference is being used on the website I quoted and where they got the 'woman set over others' definition.
As for no women preachers, you are simply out of gas. You cannot use a scripture that states women are to be silent (and use it out of context), then justify women singing, praying, prophesying, teaching Sunday School, and testifying....all in the confines of those four walls you call a church. Paul didn't make any such exemptions.
You poopoo away Deborah, Huldah, and Anna, but they aren't poopooed by God, and He's the One who called them to do what He asked of them. I'm glad you weren't around to discourage them. And I hope and pray you aren't responsible for shutting the mouths of God's vessels that happen to be female.
__________________
I've gone and done it now! I'm on Facebook!!!
You say it's "clear that Phoebe taught others.....". Passage please:_____________. Ho-Hum, another unfilled blank by Heavenlyone. Succourrer simply means "helper, assistant,"....not a "Preacher/Teacher".
"Silent" in I Tim. 2 & I Cor. 14 literally means, "Quiet, Still". So, we see that this word does not carry the idea of total "Zip-Lip," but she's still to "learn" not "teach". And, I've already told you that I don't call the "4 walls" a "church"....will not explain again.
Still waiting on you to address I Tim. 2, I Cor. 14, I Tim. 3, etc. ad nauseum, which you apparently cannot do [go figure]. And where does the Scriptural record say that Deborah, Huldah, Anna [or ANY other woman] were preachers of the Word of God:________________? You really do need to get honest w/ Scripture & quit wresting them to your destruction.
And, yes, The Lord has graciously used me to lead some women to the Biblical truth about women preachers...which I'll continue to do, until someone can honestly show me something FROM THE SCRIPTURES. One lady "minister" renounced women preachers after much dialogue, then started it up again, which has brought much shame/embarassment to her daughter [trust me I know the situation closely].
In sum, this lady is simply doing what she wants to do [self-will]...at the expense of God's Bible...sad, very sad. Of course, she's been a trouble saint for several Pastors [go figure]. I honestly fear for her in eternity, not that I'm perfect, but I'm not just going to ignore the Scriptures (or explain them away), which will judge us at the Throne of God.
To the other person about rings & Is. 3, God-Breathed Scripture repeatedly condemns the literal wearing of jewelry by God's people. And Is. 3 still stands as a positive witness against the practice, & is not so easily explained away w/ just a whisk of the keyboard.
Muuuuuuuuch more to say [especially about "goo-nay" in I Tim. 2], but gotta' run for a couple of days..........
And where does the Scriptural record say that Deborah, Huldah, Anna [or ANY other woman] were preachers of the Word of God:________________? You really do need to get honest w/ Scripture & quit wresting them to your destruction.
Do you read their words in the Bible? Did they say 'thus saith the Lord'?? They were speaking the word of God, whether you want to admit it or not. Their words are the very words of God. You can't even make that claim without quoting from the Bible.
__________________
I've gone and done it now! I'm on Facebook!!!
Last edited by HeavenlyOne; 10-06-2009 at 06:45 PM.
These women [Huldah only] was spontaneously moved upon by the Spirit of God to PROPHESY of God's future plans. They did not take a text from the Scriptures [even when they were brought to them, as w/ Huldah, hmmmm] & begin to spit & sputter like a man [blaming it on the "anointing"], as they do in modern churches.
Most of the errror in the women preacher doctrine stems from a misunderstanding of what the term "Prophesy" literally means, & how it was used in Bible times.
Even though I only about 1/2 to 2/3 agree with you RDP, it is fun to watch this. It is interesting, and very telling, that your opposition has repeatedly ignored your verses in order to continue to try to argue over the definition of preaching and try to bring out a bunch of obscure greek definitions and such.
Well...judgment day will reveal a lot of things...I am glad that as a small child HE called me...but I will not debate the subject...when the books are opened on that day...we will all be judged according to WHAT the BIBLE really means...not what we think it means...
__________________
Monies to help us may be sent to P.O. Box 797, Jonesville, La 71343.
If it is for one of our direct needs please mark it on the check.
Facebook Janice LaVaun Taylor Alvear
Linear Mode
