End Time Army of Women Preachers Psalms 68:11

[Sasha]

Originally Posted by rdp

We have explained this Greek term over & over on this thread - go back & do your own homework (the link is even there for you read it yourself). It has absolutely nothing to do with "co-teaching-preaching" alongside the Apostle Paul. Silly argument.

So tell me, who were Paul's colaborers that were not teaching/preaching with Paul?

Women are not to teach-preach to men in the church - & that includes Y-O-U . See how easy that was?

What does that have to do with what I said? I'm not preaching here, nor do I preach anywhere. And this isn't church.

Which being interpreted means "I have no response to this other than ridicule" !


Yea', what was I ever thinking appealing to Jesus as an example ?

I don't think Jesus would be happy with you comparing yourself to Him, especially your behavior on this forum.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Sasha

So tell me, who were Paul's colaborers that were not teaching/preaching with Paul?






What does that have to do with what I said? I'm not preaching here, nor do I preach anywhere. And this isn't church.




I don't think Jesus would be happy with you comparing yourself to Him, especially your behavior on this forum.

LOL - Nice Socratic-method you got going on there (sure you're not a JW?)- not buying into it.

Answer is still the same - go back & take a look on this thread where I specifically explicated the role of Paul's "co-laborers" - Will not sit here & chase your silly rabbit-trails all night...esp. when I have already covered this in detail on this same thread (going to supper soon anyway).

[Sasha]

Originally Posted by rdp

LOL - Nice Socratic-method you got going on there (sure you're not a JW?)- not buying into it.

Answer is still the same - go back & take a look on this thread where I specifically explicated the role of Paul's "co-laborers" - Will not sit here & chase your silly rabbit-trails all night...esp. when I have already covered this in detail on this same thread (going to supper soon anyway).

Perhaps having a dialogue with you would be easier without inuendoes and mocking smiley faces. It's hard to know what you are really saying when all I read is sarcasm, disgust, and you placing yourself on a pedestal because you claim to be a preacher.

How about coming down to my level, just a lowly woman, perhaps not worthy of being in your presence?

Just a simple answer. Who were those men colaboring with Paul but were not preaching?

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Sasha

Perhaps having a dialogue with you would be easier without inuendoes and mocking smiley faces. It's hard to know what you are really saying when all I read is sarcasm, disgust, and you placing yourself on a pedestal because you claim to be a preacher.

How about coming down to my level, just a lowly woman, perhaps not worthy of being in your presence?

Just a simple answer. Who were those men colaboring with Paul but were not preaching?

First, take your own medicine - YOU stop with the insults & we'll get along just fine (don't you remember the "standards" thread?). So, remove the beam from your own eye before you start pointing at mine .


Second, you can ask the same question 50 times & the answer will be the same every time - go back & read this thread over if you want answers to your question - I've already been through this on here over & over & over - & will not just sit here all night repeating myself.


What part of that did you not comprehend?

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Sasha

Perhaps having a dialogue with you would be easier without inuendoes and mocking smiley faces. It's hard to know what you are really saying when all I read is sarcasm, disgust, and you placing yourself on a pedestal because you claim to be a preacher.

How about coming down to my level, just a lowly woman, perhaps not worthy of being in your presence?

Just a simple answer. Who were those men colaboring with Paul but were not preaching?

Luke was a close companion of Paul and it is never recorded that he preached a message. He was certainly a co-laborer with Paul.

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by Pliny

Luke was a close companion of Paul and it is never recorded that he preached a message. He was certainly a co-laborer with Paul.

Pliny, this is a poor argument. The fact that scripture doesn't record something doesn't mean it didn't happen. Universal negative....

We don't even have all the things that Jesus did recorded in scripture.

John 21:25 "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen."

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by MissBrattified

Pliny, this is a poor argument. The fact that scripture doesn't record something doesn't mean it didn't happen. Universal negative....

We don't even have all the things that Jesus did recorded in scripture.

John 21:25 "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen."

This is an argument from silence. You assume Luke preached when that has never been hinted at. Please offer some substance. It is a fact that Luke was a companion of Paul. It is a fact that Luke is never hinted at as being a preacher. John 21 is referencing a time before the Paul and Luke travels and is pertinent to the disciples not Luke or Paul.

If you want to make a positive assertion that Luke preached then offer proof. Otherwise, the assumption must be that he didn't. That is simply deductive reasoning. Based upon your logic Peter could be said to be the first Pope because the scripture never says he wasn't. Therefore, if you want to turn Luke into a bishop or preacher provide positive proof of your assertion. Until such a time as that it must be assumed that he was not since there is zero evidence to support the claim - deductive reasoning.

All preachers may be men but not all men are preachers therefore provide evidence to support Luke was a preacher.

[Sasha]

Originally Posted by Pliny

Luke was a close companion of Paul and it is never recorded that he preached a message. He was certainly a co-laborer with Paul.

Might not be recorded but silence doesn't offer a good argument either way. However, Paul never mentions mere church goers as co-laborers. He specifies how they differ in the words he chooses to use in describing them. There has to be something said for that, IMO.

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Sasha

Might not be recorded but silence doesn't offer a good argument either way. However, Paul never mentions mere church goers as co-laborers. He specifies how they differ in the words he chooses to use in describing them. There has to be something said for that, IMO.

Deductive reasoning lets us know that Luke was not a preacher. To make that assertion please offer positive evidence. This is nothing more than an argument from silence.

[Sasha]

Originally Posted by Pliny

Deductive reasoning lets us know that Luke was not a preacher. To make that assertion please offer positive evidence. This is nothing more than an argument from silence.

I'm not arguing Luke. You are the one who brought him up.