Do You Believe In Women Preachers?

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Spare you the obsolete (please get a dictionary) Young's? As if I was going to quote Young's? lol I don't see anything here that refutes my point. Just more red herring


We were talking about prophetesses...you asked where in the NT we find a prophetess and I answered., Once again you introduce a red herring. Im sure others notice that your argument has relied heavily on style (bold letters, dark colors, smily faces and misdirected arguments, which all mask frantic hand waving) over substance.


And you obviously disobey the bible when you don't go around greeting every brother and sister with a kiss...so why are you so selective about what you will obey or teach others from the word?

You still can't prove how "exercise authority" means "Preaching what the bible says" which is as an inane an assertion anyone can make

How typical. I ask you to support your "prophetess" doctrine w/ just ONE example in the NT....& you [as usual] scream "red herring," all the while another blank goes unfilled! Oh & BTW, YOU have posted several smiley faces to me! So, typical Praxeas "debating," what you charge me w/, you yourself violate! Why am I not surprised?

So, will YOU be "consistent," & say that ALL of the Bible is now only a "cultural" deal, not to be taken literally today??? Why not.....might wanna' look at thyself before you beller' "inconsistency" to me!

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by rdp

How typical. I ask you to support your "prophetess" doctrine w/ just ONE example in the NT....& you [as usual] scream "red herring," all the while another blank goes unfilled! Oh & BTW, YOU have posted several smiley faces to me! So, typical Praxeas "debating," what you charge me w/, you yourself violate! Why am I not surprised?

So, will YOU be "consistent," & say that ALL of the Bible is now only a "cultural" deal, not to be taken literally today??? Why not.....might wanna' look at thyself before you beller' "inconsistency" to me!

All of the Bible should we read with consideration given to culture -- not the the Bible is a "culture deal."

We have to understand what the writers intended for the original audience before we can make application today. Hermeneutics 101.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by rdp

Junia is a 3rd declencion MASCULINE [not feminine] noun. BAGD says there's no way it can proved either way. Regardless, it says this person was "of note" among the apostles. The definite article is used indicating the 12 apostles. Soooooo, where was Junia in Acts 1????????????? This is all so silly! Why don't you just believe the Bible? "I do NOT allow a woman to teach.....".

Nothing can be proven rdp. All we have is evidence and that evidence strongly points to the name Junia being a woman's name. In fact there is almost zero evidence that the name Junia or Junias was ever a man's name. So we are safe in concluding that Junia was a woman.

Showing Junia is a woman doesn't do much. We still have a text that can either be read as "among the apostles (as in she was included in that group)" or as "among the apostles (as in by the apostles)".

Now, even if we accept the first reading that she was included in the group of apostles that doesn't prove what the word apostle meant in this context which means it doesn't really tell us what her being an apostle meant she did.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

That is the definition of a prophet, someone that prophesies.

Your attempt to avoid my point about police officers, which is what a real deflection is, is very obvious and revealing. Your avoidance of my point about Paul defining someone that is used in the gift of prophecy is a prophet is also obvious and revealing

What's "revealing" is the ad nauseum blanks that you've yet to fill out demonstrating your doctrine from the Bible! And, for about the 50th time now [go figure], 'Prophecy" is not expounding from the Scriptures to men!!!! "Revealing" indeed!

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Of course not. That is my point! Church is feminine yet it does not mean the church is a woman. Same with the generic term for all disciples being in the masculine does not mean all the church is a man or men. lol...well that one went way over your head didn't it?

"LOL" indeed! What "went over your head," was that you made an issue about gender specifics regarding grammar earlier to try & butress your unbiblical "women preacher" doctrine. I asked you to be "consistent" & apply the same criteria to the masculine of "elders"....which you waffled on!! LOL.............

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

lol, dude you obviously don't know what an equivocation fallacy is, you should stop throwing these big words out there that you don't understand

I already explained 1tim 2, then you brought us down another rabbit hole of what a prophetess was.

According to what argument and how do you get that according to that argument none of the bible is for us today? If you admit kissing is for us today why don't you greet all brothers and sisters with a kiss?

Ughhh, it was YOU who introduced the "prophettess" argument! I've just been asking for you to demonstrate what you speculate & provide us w/ just 1 example of the set-in office of a "prophetess" in the NT.

Regardless, the definition of a prophetess does not denote "women preacher's" as we pratice today. BUT, tell ya' what, I'm a fair man! I'll give ya' another shot at it Prax. Pls. give us the NT example of a "prophetess":_________________? Waiting...................

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Bump. Paul defines one that prophecies as a Prophet and says it's so we can LEARN

In the context of the gifts of the Spirit....not "preaching sermons". You only assume & speculate what you fail to demonstrate. "Bump" indeed! lol.....

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

You are obfuscating the point here, again. The POINT is you are claiming Paul gave a commandment that forbids women to teach and preach (though Paul does not say preach) and Paul also said to greet each other with a kiss. So your evaluation of what is a commandment of God we have to keep is inconsistent and subjective

Assertions are NOT evidence. But, if it makes ya' feel better about your false doctrines...go ahead! "PREACH the Word.....in all....INSTRUCTION [didasko, same word used in I Tim. 2:12!]." To Paul, "preaching" & "teaching" were synonymous terms, or are you telling us that "teaching is not preaching"???Oooops....Prax has done it again!

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

ROFL...neither is preaching, hasn't anyone ever heard Pentecostal preaching?

Yet Paul says that prophecy is so we can LEARN and be edified.

ROFL indeeeeeeeeeeeeed! Paul was talking about the gifts of the Spirit in I Cor. 12-14! "Now concerning spiritual G-I-F-T-S......" !!

Tell ya' what Prax....I'll check back in afew weeks, I've got something important coming up that I've GOT to prop for. Now, I fully expect you to claim that I'm backing out [all the while the blanks stare unfulfilled!], but I could continue this ad nauseum, as I've done for years, so say what you will, I'll be back in a couple of weeeks...trust me!

[rdp]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Nothing can be proven rdp. All we have is evidence and that evidence strongly points to the name Junia being a woman's name. In fact there is almost zero evidence that the name Junia or Junias was ever a man's name. So we are safe in concluding that Junia was a woman.

Showing Junia is a woman doesn't do much. We still have a text that can either be read as "among the apostles (as in she was included in that group)" or as "among the apostles (as in by the apostles)".

Now, even if we accept the first reading that she was included in the group of apostles that doesn't prove what the word apostle meant in this context which means it doesn't really tell us what her being an apostle meant she did.

God grief dude...did you not read what I just posted??? Junias is a MASCULINE, 3rd Declension noun.....it's NOT feminine! Man...what in the world is wrong w/ you people??????????? Do you know the imporatnce of a 3rd declension noun?