End Time Army of Women Preachers Psalms 68:11

[KeptByTheWord]

Originally Posted by RJR

If this was accurate it would be one thing. Precedent has to factor in somewhere, such as no OT female priest, no female Apostles (upon whose teaching he would build the church) chosen by The Lord, no qualifications for female bishops and deacons. Besides the fact no logical explanation has been offered for 1 Tim 2:11-12, the only one offered so far has been this is referencing a husband and wife. Which apparently only single women could then teach, or it would require the married woman to be silent in the very place Paul in 1 Cor 14 tells her to ask.

It may be comical in that we are insistent on these very transparent passages, but we are insistent, because some are insistently trying to misrepresent them.

Not sure how far back you've gone to read what was posted ages ago on this post... but.... I stand with you three, and whoever else that falls into the category that no woman should hold a ministerial position where she is required to assert authority over a male, whether it be her husband or other male. Male and females have their roles, each in different ways... but one is not any better or greater than the other.

However, I do not see in scripture where a woman is prohibited from preaching/witnessing/testifying/evangelizing, as long as that preaching does not undermine the authority of the male in charge of the service, be it her husband, or other male.

RDP's stance is that no woman has ever expounded on scriptures, and I would agree. There is no biblical reference to a woman standing with the Torah in her hand expounding on the Torah (which were the scriptures as they knew it in both OT and NT).

However, Jesus did give women instructions to go and "tell" the good news. Since the good news is now considered our NT and now our scriptures, I would see that a woman standing to share the good news of the gospel under the given authority in a meeting, would certainly be following the great commission of Jesus.

I differ from the stance the three of you have taken, as it is a dogmatic stance that excludes a woman from being able to share the good news, whether in a pulpit, under a tree, in a prison, or anywhere else she might have the opportunity to do so, simply because we are all commissioned by Jesus to share the good news, and the good news is our NT writings, or scriptures.

That's my explanation. I don't expect to find it quite satisfactory to all who hear it, but I don't condemn anyone who doesn't agree with it either. Believe your interpretation, live it, whatever.... but .... leave off the condemning of others who may not see it just like you... that is simply how I am looking at this.

[RJR]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

Not sure how far back you've gone to read what was posted ages ago on this post... but.... I stand with you three, and whoever else that falls into the category that no woman should hold a ministerial position where she is required to assert authority over a male, whether it be her husband or other male. Male and females have their roles, each in different ways... but one is not any better or greater than the other.

However, I do not see in scripture where a woman is prohibited from preaching/witnessing/testifying/evangelizing, as long as that preaching does not undermine the authority of the male in charge of the service, be it her husband, or other male.

RDP's stance is that no woman has ever expounded on scriptures, and I would agree. There is no biblical reference to a woman standing with the Torah in her hand expounding on the Torah (which were the scriptures as they knew it in both OT and NT).

However, Jesus did give women instructions to go and "tell" the good news. Since the good news is now considered our NT and now our scriptures, I would see that a woman standing to share the good news of the gospel under the given authority in a meeting, would certainly be following the great commission of Jesus.

I differ from the stance the three of you have taken, as it is a dogmatic stance that excludes a woman from being able to share the good news, whether in a pulpit, under a tree, in a prison, or anywhere else she might have the opportunity to do so, simply because we are all commissioned by Jesus to share the good news, and the good news is our NT writings, or scriptures.

That's my explanation. I don't expect to find it quite satisfactory to all who hear it, but I don't condemn anyone who doesn't agree with it either. Believe your interpretation, live it, whatever.... but .... leave off the condemning of others who may not see it just like you... that is simply how I am looking at this.

Obviously no qualifications given for witnessing, it is an act enabled by the Spirit, even prophesy etc., but when you get into the office of ministry, even among the Spirit filled believer, there are qualifications.

It appears to me the very thing you find distasteful in our position in which we insist, you find yourself compelled to respond. I do not feel I have condemned you any more than the condemnation that you have articulated for our position.

[Praxeas]

"Brothers" is often used generally for all believers.

Act 1:13 And when they had entered, they went up to the upper room, where they were staying, Peter and John and James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot and Judas the son of James.
Act 1:14 All these with one accord were devoting themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers.
Act 1:15 In those days Peter stood up among the brothers (the company of persons was in all about 120) and said,
Act 1:16 "Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus.

[RJR]

In 1 Cor 14 everyone could prophesy, but obviously there was a dileniation between prophesy and the speaking of 1 Cor 14:34-35. Which is glaring, in the fact, that there has to be a difference between prophesy and PREACHING, must I add, that the word for speak is translated preach or one of its cognates 6 times in scripture.

[Sasha]

Originally Posted by RJR

In 1 Cor 14 everyone could prophesy, but obviously there was a dileniation between prophesy and the speaking of 1 Cor 14:34-35. Which is glaring, in the fact, that there has to be a difference between prophesy and PREACHING, must I add, that the word for speak is translated preach or one of its cognates 6 times in scripture.

So? Its translated as a different word about 200 other times. Not sure what you think the point is because a word mentioned over 200 times just so happens to be translated as preach a mere 6 times elsewhere in scripture. Big deal. Its NOT translated as preach in the scriptures you keep posting.

[RJR]

Originally Posted by Sasha

So? Its translated as a different word about 200 other times. Not sure what you think the point is because a word mentioned over 200 times just so happens to be translated as preach a mere 6 times elsewhere in scripture. Big deal. Its NOT translated as preach in the scriptures you keep posting.

In light of the fact that woman could witness as empowered by the HG, she could prophesy and pray in the church, she could sing psalms, have an interpretation, speak in tongues, have a revelation. Yet, in verses 34-35 there was a certain kind of speaking she could NOT do in the church, comparing that to 1 Tim 2, would you mind giving an educated guess as to what type of speaking by a woman was prohibited in the church? Keep in mind, the glaring and undeniable precedent established, by the facts, no female priest in temple or tabernacle, no qualifications for a female bishop or deacon, no female apostle chosen by Christ, and coupled with the fact of the definitions of the words as well as their usage, leaves little room for your conclusions, eh?

[Sasha]

Originally Posted by RJR

In light of the fact that woman could witness as empowered by the HG, she could prophesy and pray in the church, she could sing psalms, have an interpretation, speak in tongues, have a revelation. Yet, in verses 34-35 there was a certain kind of speaking she could NOT do in the church, comparing that to 1 Tim 2, would you mind giving an educated guess as to what type of speaking by a woman was prohibited in the church? Keep in mind, the glaring and undeniable precedent established, by the facts, no female priest in temple or tabernacle, no qualifications for a female bishop or deacon, no female apostle chosen by Christ, and coupled with the fact of the definitions of the words as well as their usage, leaves little room for your conclusions, eh?

This is exactly how errors in doctrine occur. Take an instance here, pull a definition from there, use an example over there, stir it up with lack of mention and VOILA!! You have serpent seed doctrine, snake handling doctrine, and no Jesus name baptism doctrine.

You also excuse women to do things that are also not mentioned in scripture with specifics you claim are lacking when it comes to women preaching. You say they can witness but I don't see where a woman in scripture ever did that. You said they can prophesy but I don't see a woman prophesying in the NT.

You can have it both ways. If you just stick to what scripture says and not add your own interpretation to it, you can't go wrong.