End Time Army of Women Preachers Psalms 68:11

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear

That is not true....why do you try to make me out A liar? I need to get to my computer to verify if I remember the exact age because if I misquotefrommemoryyousurewill call me some kind of name....I am traveling in a car But hope to get to a hotel soon...

Oh my goodness - why can't "women-preachers" see that they have the "Victim-Complex" ? Everybody's out to get 'em !


To my knowledge I have never "called you a name"?? You are in defiance to clear Scripture, but I have never personally "called you a name" ?


Better document your resources well - If you are going where I think you are - it will not be pretty !

[Sasha]

Originally Posted by RJR

No need for 1 Cor 11 instructions on hair, because Sis Avear says no male or female in Christ. Sis Alvear, we will not be surprised to see you wearing that which pertains to a man, since you say no male or female in Christ. Put your endorsement on same sex marriages, since in Christ there is no males or females. No head of the woman, since there is no males or females in Christ.

Obviously, the reference is the message is the same to females-males, young-old, jews-gentiles, free-slave.

Since 1 Tim is talking about the home. A woman must learn in silence in the home. She cannot ask her husband in the home, unless in full agreement with him, because she is to learn in silence with ALL SUBJECTION. In spite of the fact 1 Cor 14 tells her to ask her husband at home. Since according to Sis Alvear, 1 Tim 2 is about the home, dealing with husband and wife, I guess only single women can preach because a married women cannot exercise authority over the man.

Originally Posted by rdp

Oh my goodness - why can't "women-preachers" see that they have the "Victim-Complex" ? Everybody's out to get 'em !


To my knowledge I have never "called you a name"?? You are in defiance to clear Scripture, but I have never personally "called you a name" ?


Better document your resources well - If you are going where I think you are - it will not be pretty !

Sis. Alvear has stated several times that she isn't a preacher. Unlike Pliny, I'm not going to quote her multiple posts where she says this, but perhaps he will if you need them.

[RJR]

Originally Posted by Sasha

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.

Originally Posted by Sasha

Sis. Alvear has stated several times that she isn't a preacher. Unlike Pliny, I'm not going to quote her multiple posts where she says this, but perhaps he will if you need them.

Ladies and gentleman, please delete all occasions of Jesus name baptism in your Bibles, go out and buy some snakes, and subscribe to the serpent seed doctrine, while Sashha tries to find missionary, and then to double her jeopardy, she is going too try to find a female missionary in the Bible.

Is this the same woman who needed to have "specifics in scripture so we would not subscribe to serpent seed, snake handling, and no Jesus name baptism."

I see her requirements are only for others, however she did try to explain away the direct quote from scripture, its usage in other places, and its definitions from the Greek, as well as the glaring facts of no woman evangelist, missionary, priest, apostle chosen by Christ, qualifications for female bishops or deacons.

[Praxeas]

Sis Alvear. Did you read my posted article?

[Sasha]

Originally Posted by RJR

Ladies and gentleman, please delete all occasions of Jesus name baptism in your Bibles, go out and buy some snakes, and subscribe to the serpent seed doctrine, while Sashha tries to find missionary, and then to double her jeopardy, she is going too try to find a female missionary in the Bible.

Is this the same woman who needed to have "specifics in scripture so we would not subscribe to serpent seed, snake handling, and no Jesus name baptism."

I see her requirements are only for others, however she did try to explain away the direct quote from scripture, its usage in other places, and its definitions from the Greek, as well as the glaring facts of no woman evangelist, missionary, priest, apostle chosen by Christ, qualifications for female bishops or deacons.

Nice way to incorectly summarize my posts. Have a nice day.

[RJR]

Originally Posted by Sasha

Nice way to incorectly summarize my posts. Have a nice day.

I will do my best to have a nice day. Remember to not force on others the very thing you try to avoid yourself. You were the one who implied a lack of specifics gave way to the false doctrines you proffered. When I asked for specifics to your claims you said you and yours did not need specifics.

[Sasha]

Originally Posted by RJR

I will do my best to have a nice day. Remember to not force on others the very thing you try to avoid yourself. You were the one who implied a lack of specifics gave way to the false doctrines you proffered. When I asked for specifics to your claims you said you and yours did not need specifics.

You need to read my post again. I said nothing about specifics. That post was about people who take a verse here and there and one from that spot and stir it all up with their faulty understanding to come up with a doctrine. IOW, if you want the bible to say something, you can find a verse that can appear to agree with you.

[RJR]

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?

Sasha, this was my post from page 215 that you quoted in post 2194, page 220 and here was your response.

Originally Posted by Sasha

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.

Originally Posted by RJR

Sasha, I want to know before I proceed, are you saying that a woman witnessing and prophesying is the same as serpent seed doctrine and "no Jesus name doctrine?"

I can produce the passages where women were told they would witness and prophesy, can you produce one where a woman was told to PREACH? You give your verses and then I will produce mine.

Originally Posted by Sasha

No.



Show me a verse where a woman prophesied in the NT. Not that they would. But that they DID.

Not that I personally care, since I'm not the one who has to see it specifically in scripture to believe that it pertains to me and my children. YOU are the one wanting specifics.

Originally Posted by RJR

As to your answer to the first question, good!

As to your first question in this post, Paul was addressing the proper approach to prophecy, in this passage he is bringing order to something they are doing, prayeth and prohesieth. Notice also verse 13, Paul was not asking if it in some future time would be comely, he was asking was it comely for them to presently pray uncovered. Here is the passage.

1Co 11:5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.

1Co 11:13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?

Originally Posted by RJR

Ladies and gentleman, please delete all occasions of Jesus name baptism in your Bibles, go out and buy some snakes, and subscribe to the serpent seed doctrine, while Sashha tries to find missionary, and then to double her jeopardy, she is going too try to find a female missionary in the Bible.

Is this the same woman who needed to have "specifics in scripture so we would not subscribe to serpent seed, snake handling, and no Jesus name baptism."

I see her requirements are only for others, however she did try to explain away the direct quote from scripture, its usage in other places, and its definitions from the Greek, as well as the glaring facts of no woman evangelist, missionary, priest, apostle chosen by Christ, qualifications for female bishops or deacons.

Also, I am not going to let you by with this last comment you made above.




You are the one who brought specifics into the discussion, remember this post?

Originally Posted by Sasha

Nice way to incorectly summarize my posts. Have a nice day.

Originally Posted by RJR

I will do my best to have a nice day. Remember to not force on others the very thing you try to avoid yourself. You were the one who implied a lack of specifics gave way to the false doctrines you proffered. When I asked for specifics to your claims you said you and yours did not need specifics.

Originally Posted by Sasha

You need to read my post again. I said nothing about specifics. That post was about people who take a verse here and there and one from that spot and stir it all up with their faulty understanding to come up with a doctrine. IOW, if you want the bible to say something, you can find a verse that can appear to agree with you.

I did and it appears you are requiring me to post scriptures that specifically stated, (I do think I showed ample scriptures and precedent, how many do you need?) and yet while you ask me to provide them and in your first response to me say, "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"

In other words, when I do provide passages and give precedent you say this is how false doctrine occurs, and then turn around and say you and your children do not need specifics. You offer no logical recourse, doomed if I do and still doomed if I don't.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Sasha

Sis. Alvear has stated several times that she isn't a preacher. Unlike Pliny, I'm not going to quote her multiple posts where she says this, but perhaps he will if you need them.

Hmmm, didn't realize I jerked your chain ?