End Time Army of Women Preachers Psalms 68:11

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Disciple4life

Usually when you go to a job you have to plead and kick and scream to get you fellow coworkers to do any work. With women preachers nobody wants them to work. How ironic it this?

I guess it is contagious...

How many times has it been said:

Originally Posted by Pliny

This fundamental lack of knowledge has been seen consistently over and over in spite of the many times it has been said that women should witness and seek to be used in the gifts of the Spirit yet still there remains a stubborn willful ignorance to the facts. We even saw earlier where she made up her own facts that are patently false - the idea that Paul would never quote from the Talmud or the writer of Corinthians was quoting the Talmud (something to that effect) is patently false because the Talmud, specifically the Mishna was not began until the end of the 2nd century or the early third century.

http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...50#post1301550

Originally Posted by Pliny

One more time. All should witness, all should seek to be used of God and everyone has a place in the kingdom of God. Men are not any better than women and there is nothing more beautiful than a godly woman. Likewise, there is nothing more ugly than a woman trying to be a man or vice versa. There is a created order. Man was created first. The woman was deceived not the man. These are the arguments of Paul. The Elders, men, are tasked with feeding the flock of God - a bishop must be the husband of one wife.

http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...76#post1301576

Originally Posted by Pliny

Object lesson once again. Everyone should be encouraged to witness and be used in the gifts of the Spirit. Only men, and few of them, are called to be bishops/elders feeding the flock of God.

You just cannot seem to understand fundamental concepts which is an object lesson as to why women should not teach or preach - to act as bishops/elders.

http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...77#post1301577

Originally Posted by Pliny

Once again...
Everyone should witness and seek to be used in the gifts of the Spirit. The leading of the church, the teaching and preaching - feeding God's flock is the role of a man. The fact that so many women cannot understand that basic fundamental fact is an object lesson in why women should not be allowed to do so. The feeding of the flock is to the elders (Acts 20:17; 28). These elders are the bishops that were the husbands of one wife.

To take this logic would mean that no one needs a shepherd because they can all teach some body some thing. It is this spirit precisely that Got Miriam and Aaron into trouble.

http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...79#post1301579



The irony is people refuse to accept what has been stated and cling to emotional nonsense.

[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.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Disciple4life

After me and my wife first got into church, we were invited to another church by a preacher we knew. So we show up and my friend the preacher introduces us to everybody. He also introduced me to Sis so and so and commented that she was a preacher. This threw me for a loop. I knew my friend didn't believe in woman preachers. So I asked him about it later when we were alone. My friend said that he didn't believe in woman preachers but he might be wrong, or she might be wrong. Either way he was going to pray for her and give her the respect that she deserved. My friend was a real class act.

Personally I find it odd to introduce someone "She's a preacher" or "He's a preacher" as if we needed to know.

Does anyone ever get introduced as "She's a soul winner" or "a prayer warrior"?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear

sorry so scatterd I have a busting headache...
No Praxeas but I will...Blessings to you.

[Disciple4life]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Personally I find it odd to introduce someone "She's a preacher" or "He's a preacher" as if we needed to know.

Does anyone ever get introduced as "She's a soul winner" or "a prayer warrior"?

Yes I have went to church many times and been introduced to a little old lady and been told she is a mighty prayer warrior.

[Sasha]

Originally Posted by Pliny

This is a stupid question since it has been said multiple times:

http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...50#post1301550



http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...76#post1301576



http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...77#post1301577



http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...79#post1301579


You obviously have not paid attention.

I was just wanting clarification, that's all.

And since you have affirmed what you have said over and over, why are you taking offense to what others are saying that is different than what you are saying? You quoted Esther speaking about men who are against women who help save souls. That obviously wasn't a post speaking about you, yet you responded as if it was. I didn't see her name you specifically, so I'm wondering why you took offense when she wss just making a statement that didn't apply to you. Thats all I'm pointing out.

[Disciple4life]

What if we put all this energy into saving souls?

[Sasha]

Originally Posted by Pliny

I guess it is contagious...

How many times has it been said:


http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...50#post1301550



http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...76#post1301576



http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...77#post1301577



http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...79#post1301579



The irony is people refuse to accept what has been stated and cling to emotional nonsense.

You are not the only person posting on this thread. If someone makes a statement and you haven't said it, then they aren't talking about you.

[KeptByTheWord]

Originally Posted by Sasha

You are not the only person posting on this thread. If someone makes a statement and you haven't said it, then they aren't talking about you.

Speak, teach and preach it sista!

[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.