Can Women Pastor ?

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by simplyme

You truley think that is a christian attitude? If that is all you can say maybe you should go somewhere else and spread you ideas.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by jfrog

I guess I need to quote verse 16. Isaiah 3:16 "Moreover, the Lord saith, Because the daughters of Zion are haughty, and walk with stretched forth necks and wanton eyes, walking and mincing as they go, and making a tinkling with their feet:"

Let's also take a look at verse 17. Isaiah 3:17 "Therefore, the Lord will smite with a scab the crown of the head of the daughters of Zion, and the Lord will discover their secret parts."

The verse 17 beginning with "therefore" clearly is talking about what those judgments would be. It is immediately after the verse 17 which introduces judgments (God smiting with a scab the crown of the head, and discovering their secret parts) that a list of various items appear, most of which I am ignorant to what are. In introducing the list of items, Verse 18, it begins "In that day the Lord will...". Surely, if in verse 16 it says "because" in an explanatory sense (we agree on something!! YAY!) and in verse 17 it describes some judgments, and in verse 18 it describes more of the Lord's actions (paraphrasing it says, in that day the Lord will...), surely those actions described are judgments and not explanatory of why the judgment is coming.

Grammatically, the reciprocal relationship is between "Because" in vs. 16 & then "Therefore" in the subsequest verse. The "therefore" is always an explanatore term, which reveals the reason why God was going to judge them. In this connection we find the list of ornamentation. At the very least, this does not cast a favorable light on ornamentation by God's people. Blessings............

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

This is why we have so many false doctrines running around, someone takes a negative passage like this and makes a doctrine out of it. Do you not realize this is just what the Pharasee were doing when Christ upbraded them so much. They had taken the laws of God and tried to make them better in thier eyes when they had only succeded in making things into traditions of men.
Isa 3:16 Moreover the LORD saith, Because the daughters of Zion are haughty, and walk with stretched forth necks and wanton eyes, walking and mincing as they go, and making a tinkling with their feet:

The statement here is why the Lord is Going to take away their jewlery not that it was wrong to wear. It is what their attitude was. Maybe your forgeting God gave it (jewlery to them) if the rings or jewls were a sin then why did God give it to them in the first place.

Eze 16:10 I clothed thee also with broidered work, and shod thee with badgers' skin, and I girded thee about with fine linen, and I covered thee with silk.
Eze 16:11 I decked thee also with ornaments, and I put bracelets upon thy hands, and a chain on thy neck. Eze 16:12 And I put a jewel on thy forehead, and earrings in thine ears, and a beautiful crown upon thine head.
Eze 16:13 Thus wast thou decked with gold and silver; and thy raiment was of fine linen, and silk, and broidered work; thou didst eat fine flour, and honey, and oil: and thou wast exceeding beautiful, and thou didst prosper into a kingdom.

Wow did God say he decked her with rings, bracelets etc.

Its not the wearing of jewlery that is the sin it is the attitude.

And the derogitive remarks made by a couple of the posters on here truly show your true spirit. Trust me I have been in the ministry for 30 plus years and born into Apostolic UPCI. I know all the scriptures you quote I preached them myself. I ask God 20 years ago to show me his word because I did not want to preach something that was not in the word of God I have sent the last 20+ years studing whe word front and backwards. You can think what you want to about the way I see things. Bottom line I am not closed to being wrong and I can admit to being wrong, because I know I don't know it all and neither do you. So when we judge our brother because we don't see eye to eye, remmember as you judge so will you be judged by God.

I see, you take parabolic/metaphorical Scripture from Ezek. [which also mentions nose rings...which I guess is also okay, eh?] & use them to override passages that clearly condems the literal wearing of jewelry! Pooooooor hermeneutics. Is. 3 stands as a positive witness against jewelry for His people...no matter how much you try to erase it, it's still staring you in the face.

While I agree that we need God to "show us His Word," can you not just take it for what it says? Oh, & "whi is my mother and my brother, but he that does the WILL OF GOD."

[rdp]

Originally Posted by HeavenlyOne

Ahh.....just as I thought. When it's a man prophet, he's preaching. If it's a woman prophet, she's merely prophesying!

But guess what? The same word for 'preach' is used to describe what Deborah told Barak. Thank you and you're welcome.

But you first show me where any scripture says that women cannot preach to a church congregation. The one you keep using doesn't say that, so try again.

I'm waiting. If all you can do it use the same lame 'women cannot speak in the church' and use that to say women can't preach, sorry. The verse doesn't say that, in spite of you wanting it to.

As usual, you miss the entire point & totally evade my questions, so lets try it again. What passage literally shows where God told a woman to "preach"__________? Did Deborah expound from the Law to Barak, or did she foretell what God would do [prophesy]? And, what translation literally translates this word used w/ Deborah in the verse as "preach":_____________? Why not? Do you understand that word meanings are only applicable as it relates to context? Or, do you know better than approximately 1000 linguistical scholars, combining the modern translations?

Regardless, Deborah was under the NT economy & teachings of the Apostles in the church epistles [which you absolutely refuse to engage]. Not that it matters, since NOTHING is said about her "preaching" from the Word of God [as lady "preachers" do today].

I will say, in honesty, that I suppose that one can classify prophecy as a certain form of "preaching". But the form that it's in is that of its Biblical context, which is to spontaneously reveal the hidden things of God [as innumerable Biblical examples demonstrate], either in foretelling [primary definition], or forthtelling [secondary definition]. But it IS NOT taking a text from the Scriptures [as modern women "preachers" do], & expounding there-from [I will not even address the spittin' & sputterin' masculinity that I've witnessed (very embarrasing)].

As for your request showing where women are forbidden to preach, happy to oblige: "Let your women keep silent in the church, FOR IT IS NOT PERMITTED UNTO THEM TO SPEAK...." The Greel word for "speak" here is "La-leh-o," & is translated "PREACH" at least 6 times [hmmmm]. It defines as 'to utter words, speak, or preach'. Now, which definition fits a church service, which is the context of I Cor. 14? If it's "to utter words," then she cannot even pray...which leaves w/ "to PREACH"....you're very welcome!

I Tim. 2, says that women are to remain silent [still, quiet] & forbidden to "teach"...which is the same word for what Jesus did when He entered the synagogues & "taught" the people. Tell me Heavenlyone, was He "Preaching" to those in the synangogue? Of course He was, & this is what Paul explicitly forbids a woman to do "in the house of God, which is the church..." You should invest some time in how the NT uses the terms "Teach" & "Preach"...since they're synonymous/interchangeable terms.

Perhaps I should get you a copy of my book on this matter, where I handle these issues more exhaustively....not that you would change, for if you won't believe Paul, you won't believe me either [even though I totally exhausted this subject from Gen.-Rev., using word definitions, Biblical examples & Greek letter parsing]!

Gotta' go, busy today..............

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

I noticed how you folks omit the primary definition of "Prophesy," which is to "for-tell". Primarily, prophecy deals w/ the spontaneous moving of God's Spirit to reveal the hidden [see Elizabeth, Zachariah, Lk.1]...not preaching a sermon from the Scriptures! The definitions that you are giving is only secondary, possible definitions. Why not list Strong's [for one] definition? And, I do not "do the same thing today"....& call it preaching [misrepresentation]. I Tim. 2, I Cor. 14, etc. is dealing w/ a church-setting, as I've pointed out NUMEROUS times.

Still waiting on you to deal w/ I Tim. 2, etc., etc., etc.....probably for a looooong time! Godsdrummer is sooo ridiculous that it does not even merit a scholarly response. But, I'll probably get around to him soon, when things slow down for me. In sum, he rerlegates the great apostle Paul's teaching to only relevant for his day!! Hmmm, I wonder if that also includes his teachings on faith?? Paul. appealed to headship in I Tim. 2...not just some arbitrary cultural idea!

I actually agree w/ Sis. Alvear...we'll be judged by SCRIPTURE [such as I Tim. 2, I Cor. 14, I Tim. 3, etc.]....not dream & visions.

How and where do you get that I Tim. 2 is speaking of a church setting? Come on you want someone to address these two chapters yet you act like only you know what they mean. Ya right. First Paul is addressing the way we are to deal with government dignitaries, ie Kings and all who are in authority. This is not the church this is the world.
Next:
1Ti 2:8 I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.
Again this is not the church setting but the way we are to present ourself to the world.
So do tell me where you get that chapter 2 in speaking of the church setting?

Paul then changes his subject in chapter 3 when he speaks of spiritual leaders. This is called rightly dividing the word.
2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.[/QUOTE]

Glad to oblige. Paul wrote his entire epistle to Timothy, "that you may KNOW HOW TO BEHAVE YOURSELF IN THE HOUSE OF GOD, WHICH IS THE CHURCH...." Can you not read this? Paul is talking about "the church" order. Sheesh!

As I've already told you, chp. & vs. divisions did not come into play until the 1300's. Originally, there were NO chp. divisions, the thought simply continued. So, it only reveals poor scholardhip for one to appeal to Chp. & vs. divisions.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

To continue...

1Co 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.
1Co 14:35 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.

As I have said before this is the church setting but just what is Paul saying here? That a woman cannot speak if God moves on her? As you are arguing a woman cannot speak at all. Silence mean silence by your interpretation. Yet
1Co 14:31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.

Act 2:17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

You contradit yourself either a women can or cannot prophecy if she can prophecy then the silence in the church must mean something other than what you are trying to say it means. And the only one the word says a women cannot ursurp authority over is her own father or her husband. Even the Law does not make a women a lesser human. She is to be in subjection to her father until she is married then to her husband. Give me bible where a women is to be in all subjection to any other man.

Dude, can you not read? I've repeatedly explained the word "silent" from the Greek definition. Will not continue to do so. Repent & believe the Word of God.

[simplyme]

Originally Posted by rdp

Dude, can you not read? I've repeatedly explained the word "silent" from the Greek definition. Will not continue to do so. Repent & believe the Word of God.

AMEN!Don't you just hate it (or is it just me?) when people do NOT listen!! its all on their side, can't get a word in?
Oh I know people like this here and now, I'm just getting over a headache from one such person, {phone call} whom unfortuneately, is family.oops, make that 2 such persons, back-to-back, LORD give me strength!!
..and patience;
NOW!
Is it too much to ask for equal time? {apparently}
I find it VERY self-centerd when one party pretty much ignores the
other for their over-the-top zealousness
(actually it borders on bullyishness).

OK!! done with the RANT!

Goin to siesta time., for regroup prayer.

[simplyme]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

You truley think that is a christian attitude? If that is all you can say maybe you should go somewhere else and spread you ideas.

Ahhh but you have NO idea what I might be sayin (or thinkin) so why the
rush to judgment?
Is THAT a christian attitude worth emulating?













*oops, I for a 2nd I forgot where I'm at-never mind
blame it on the headache*

[Nitehawk013]

Maybe we should just sum it up like this?

Can they pastor? Of course they can. Should they biblically be doing it? No. Since when has the Bible not permitting somethign stopped people from doing it and thinking they are right with God?

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by rdp

Grammatically, the reciprocal relationship is between "Because" in vs. 16 & then "Therefore" in the subsequest verse. The "therefore" is always an explanatore term, which reveals the reason why God was going to judge them. In this connection we find the list of ornamentation. At the very least, this does not cast a favorable light on ornamentation by God's people. Blessings............

"Because" is the word used as an explanation of why God was judging them. "Therefore" is not a word used as an explanation of why God is judging them but the declaration of what judgments are against them. I'll make it as simple as I can. Because they did something, therefore God did something. In fact, I will go so far to say that the word "therefore" can NEVER be used as an explanation of why. Whatever immediately follows the word "because" is ALWAYS the explanation of why.

God judged Egypt by taking away their first born sons, this did not mean God was displeased with them because they had first born sons. This shows that the judgments of God by themselves bear no implication about God's pleasure or displeasure with what he is taking away. (Unless you are willing to say that God was displeased that they had firstborn sons)

All I want rdp, is for everyone to let the bible say what it means in a particular passage. We do God a great disservice when we tell others a passage means something when it does not. It even does more harm than good for whatever doctrine you are using that passage to support, because when a person sees flaws in any bit of the evidence given in support of something, it automatically creates a sense of doubt about the reliability of the rest of the evidence that has been given. The other evidence may stand on its own or may not, but the thing is, we ought to all be diligent about the truth of our evidence so that others do not discard all of it on account of one or two flawed pieces.