Are Men in Pentecost threatened by INTELLIGENT WOMEN?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Newman

How do these conquesting men benefit from the final goal if they had to follow a pastor instead of leading? Am I misunderstanding your post?

Newman I sure didn't say what you said I said. Newman one man wears all the hats and those who sit on the pews may get to try a couple. Men need to be in the forefront taking care of the business. If there is a women pastor then watch out!!! Those people are in big trouble!

Originally Posted by Newman

And were statistics plucked out of thin air or from your church? I assure you that mine has lots of live men. If there is a statistical difference in attendance; it would only be due to man's shorter life expectency so far as I can tell. Nothing to do with weeds.

Sorry Newman I doubt you can gauge what's going on in your church with the rest of Christianity in America. You would then proceed to tell us that where you attend church is Zion and that the preaching is from a burning bush that appears in the form of a man. Sister, look it up and see who is doing what in religion at this time. I'm just not talking about Pentecost; I am talking about all forms of Christianity and other religions.

Pretty much it's the women in the forefront.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Evang.Benincasa]

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1848378/posts

Newman I thought I posted this to you a while back on FCF. I hope you read it this time.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Newman]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Newman I sure didn't say what you said I said. Newman one man wears all the hats and those who sit on the pews may get to try a couple. Men need to be in the forefront taking care of the business. If there is a women pastor then watch out!!! Those people are in big trouble!


Sorry Newman I doubt you can gauge what's going on in your church with the rest of Christianity in America. You would then proceed to tell us that where you attend church is Zion and that the preaching is from a burning bush that appears in the form of a man. Sister, look it up and see who is doing what in religion at this time. I'm just not talking about Pentecost; I am talking about all forms of Christianity and other religions.

Pretty much it's the women in the forefront.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

EB- Your theories are conflicting. Your original post spoke of a single male pastor and his family. Now you throw in a woman pastor. In both cases you suggest that the men need to be leading...

But how do we get around too many Indian Chiefs and not enough Indians if men can't serve God without somehow leading in church?

Sorry but I didn't find the 1 male for 10 female stats in the article. It showed that generally speaking there are more women participating in religious activities than men. But you are still making a leap without showing evidence to assume that the much smaller margins cited then what was stated in your post) is attributable to women leading.

Which is a odd theory in and of itself given the reality.... How many minister licenses are there among the Apostolic faith? How many ministers are women?

[Newman]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1848378/posts

Newman I thought I posted this to you a while back on FCF. I hope you read it this time.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

Interesting article but I don't know why you think it helps make your point.

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1848378/posts

Newman I thought I posted this to you a while back on FCF. I hope you read it this time.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

While men still run most churches, women outnumber them in the pews in Europe, in the , and in . And the absence of males is not of recent origin. Cotton Mather puzzled over it, and medieval preachers claimed women practice their religion far more than men did. But men do not show the same aversion to all churches and religions. The Orthodox seem to have a balance, and Islam and Judaism have a predominantly male membership. Something seems to be creating a barrier between Western Christianity and men. Why is it that men in the west are so little interested in religion and that the men who are interested often do not follow the general pattern of masculinity? Why doesn't religion seem to interest men much, until they reach old age?

It's because females dominate western culture.

Originally Posted by OP_Carl

It's funny how frequently "God decides" to succeed an outgoing pastor with the pastor's son. But let us move on . . .

I don't consider this funny: too many churches are NOT seeking God's direction in such matters!!!!!!!!

It's difficult for most people to address the original question objectively, because we all are inundated in this feminized society. We substitute fairness for righteousness in many situations, not just this one.

And to not go along with feminized society is to be a chauvanist, sexist, bigoted, neanderthal in the minds of many. We in the Church need to stop committing treason against God by our trying to conform the Church to 21st century American culture!

As far as transference goes, when I am at work I am just as fearful of offending a female as I am of offending a minority. Nowadays the grounds for dismissal are subjective, not objective. This is dangerous and a horrendous abuse of the concept of justice. The system has the aspiring middle-class white guy in the gunsights and pinned to the wall.

I don't know of a time when grounds for dismissal were ever objective.

When I am in the workplace, I don't view women in management as an affront to me, to the natural order, or to all that is holy. I view them as a minefield in the path of my career, and I walk on pins and needles around them.

When it comes to management in the workplace, I only see management and not men or women.

Church is the one place where I feel I can relax in the presence of women. In this context, intelligent women are far more desirable for conversation. I am uncomfortable with the concept of women pastors and preachers, but I am inexperienced here. My discomfort comes from my knowledge of human nature.

Paul addressed this when he said it was Eve who was deceived and not Adam.

Missing from the consiousness of many on this topic is an understanding of the nature of intelligence. I can be of superior intelligence in one realm of human experience, and of inferior intelligence in other areas. Everybody is like this. Strengths and weaknesses aren't proof of flaws.

All my intelligence and a couple of dollars might get me a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

I value, employ, and cultivate in my wife the areas in which she is more intelligent than me. I believe she has learned to reciprocate.

There's nothing wrong with that as long as both of you mind your place - the place God has established.

In a similar fashion, I can find aspects of powerful and intelligent women to value and leverage in the working relationship.

I guess I don't even think about whether someone in the workplace is male or female.

At the end of the day, the career women have my pity. I believe that they have been sold a bill of goods by the feminists about what will make them feel fulfilled in life.

Because feminism is a rebellion against God's created design for women.

On a side note, the figures cited about college graduation are often included in reports about how women earn less money. Don't be deceived by such things. Women can be and are paid the same wage for the same jobs as men. The difference is in the selection of jobs. Overall, women are more likely to select jobs with less risk, less travel, fewer hours, and less pressure. This trend is amplified when the working woman has children, an event that in itself can affect the aggregate earnings of women. Working women are more frequently the parent that takes time off when the baby is new, or when the kids are sick, etc.

Yes, it's a feminist lie! The situation where a woman is paid less than a man for THE SAME JOB (assuming the same time in the workplace or the position) was made illegal back in the early 1960s. If women are in such a situation, I expect them to file a lawsuit against the employer for violating the law.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Cotton Mather

It's because females dominate western culture.

They do .... since when?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Newman

Interesting article but I don't know why you think it helps make your point.

Originally Posted by Newman

And were statistics plucked out of thin air or from your church? I assure you that mine has lots of live men. If there is a statistical difference in attendance; it would only be due to man's shorter life expectency so far as I can tell. Nothing to do with weeds.

Newman you asked the questions I gave you the answers.

Newman do you attend a UPCI church?

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[OP_Carl]

I don't know of a time when grounds for dismissal were ever objective.

I was hastily attempting to compress my thought, here.

It used to be that the occurence of sexual harassment was proven by evidence of the words and deeds of the offender. We have crossed over into new territory lately with cases where harassment is deemed to have occurred based solely on the "feelings" of the "victim" resulting in termination. Offensiveness is so highly subjective that this kind of junk could only fly in a completely immasculated society. So now, a mentally unstable hallucinating ninny can misinterpret words or circumstances and ruin a man's life.

I find the severe shortage of male "victims" in these types of cases to be meaningful.

And I file it in the same category as the other "crimes" in this country where the suspect is no longer treated as innocent until proven guilty. All of this stuff trends in the same direction.

Originally Posted by OP_Carl

I was hastily attempting to compress my thought, here.

It used to be that the occurence of sexual harassment was proven by evidence of the words and deeds of the offender. We have crossed over into new territory lately with cases where harassment is deemed to have occurred based solely on the "feelings" of the "victim" resulting in termination. Offensiveness is so highly subjective that this kind of junk could only fly in a completely immasculated society. So now, a mentally unstable hallucinating ninny can misinterpret words or circumstances and ruin a man's life.

I find the severe shortage of male "victims" in these types of cases to be meaningful.

And I file it in the same category as the other "crimes" in this country where the suspect is no longer treated as innocent until proven guilty. All of this stuff trends in the same direction.

It's only going to get worse.