A Double Standard in Christianity?

[justbyfaith]

This is no laughing matter.

The error in the NASB is so blatant and ridiculous that it should be also identified as the "Wicked Bible". The NIV also.

 

[Ogom]

No, but since 1 Timothy 2:11-12 is in the Holy Bible, which is the inerrant Word of God, it is. So either you believe what's in it, or you don't.



No, it needs to be followed for a change.

the Spirit reveals all things... and not always in words.

 

[Ogom]

This is no laughing matter.

The error in the NASB is so blatant and ridiculous that it should be also identified as the "Wicked Bible". The NIV also.

I am not sure about translations but that family is not Christian. when they laugh it is not in great ways... or with much spiritualness/ Christ -Mind.

 

[SophieT]

Aquila was Priscilla's covering that I have spoken of.

And Philip's four daughters did not prophesy in a church setting; or, if they did, they did so with a covering on their head (1 Corinthians 11:1-16).

I'm really not interested in discussing anything with you

however, your premise is that women can NEVER teach, NEVER speak, and should always be subjected to any man in any situation within Christendom

so saying Priscilla was 'covered' by Aquila, is just you throwing yeast into the mix

if Priscilla should NEVER speak and NEVER teach, according to you, then she should have kept silent. but the Bible records that she did not keep silent, she taught Apollos. the Bible says nothing about her being covered by anyone either. those are fabrications you offer to excuse your inability to admit you are wrong about women

the Bible does not state that Philip's daughters were outside of a Christian setting. nowhere does the Bible say that.

8Leaving the next day, we went on to Caesarea and stayed at the home of Philip the evangelist, who was one of the Seven. 9He had four unmarried daughters who prophesied. Acts 21

as their father was an evangelist, and the girls were not married, it would be far more logical to think they perhaps accompanied him and spoke as the Holy Spirit encouraged them to do so

but the Bible does not say that either. so I won't say they did. if someone is prophesying, they do so OUT LOUD

you add to scripture, you distort scripture, you outright out and out DENY WHAT SCRIPTURE STATES

you are not credible and you are harming both men and women with your extra-biblical distortions

 

[JohnDB]

Simply show in God's word where it says that Apollos was a Hellenistic Jew.

If you are correct on the matter, providing the evidence can't be too hard.

If the Bible "really says" that Apollos was a Hellenistic Jew, then you should be able to show that by quoting the verse where it says that.

I'm also uncertain as to what is your vested interest in having Apollos not be the author of Hebrews.

Because if you have no vested interest in the matter, why keep arguing the point?

Because the issue is highly peripheral and has no bearing on the discussion at hand.

Actually it does...
And I have shown you how he was a Hellenistic Jew...

Im kinda laughing at how you blindly continue with your fallacy at this point and will go through all kinds of mental histrionics to avoid the obvious truths presented in scripture while you claim to have more scholarship than others with.

I will say that the entertainment value is high of you trying to do anything but recognize the truth...

Do some more...it's really fun to watch. YOUR theology is of course ridiculous as well...
I mean at first I thought you were just a troll...but then it became obvious that somehow you actually believe what you are saying... despite the obvious truth you have created your own using sliced and diced scriptures to create it with.

 

[justbyfaith]

however, your premise is that women can NEVER teach, NEVER speak, and should always be subjected to any man in any situation within Christendom

No, that is not my premise. If you had actually read my posts, you would know what my premise is.

if Priscilla should NEVER speak and NEVER teach, according to you, then she should have kept silent.

Women are to keep silence in the churches. When Priscilla corrected Apollos, it was outside of a church setting.

the Bible does not state that Philip's daughters were outside of a Christian setting. nowhere does the Bible say that.

It dos not say that they were in a church setting, either.

And I have provided for the idea that they may have prophesied in a church setting, by saying that they would have done so according to the protocol found in 1 Corinthians 11:1-16.

 

[justbyfaith]

Actually it does...
And I have shown you how he was a Hellenistic Jew...

No, you have not shown any scripture that says that Apollos was a Hellenistic Jew.

But if there is scripture to that effect, I am waiting for you to post the scripture.

 

[JohnDB]

No, you have not shown any scripture that says that Apollos was a Hellenistic Jew.

But if there is scripture to that effect, I am waiting for you to post the scripture.

Ummm
When you agreed that Apollos came from Alexandria you immediately lost...

(Psst, you aren't supposed to help my case so much it makes things too easy)

There is no city in Israel named Alexandria...and any city named "Alexandria" would be a Greek city. Just like Apollos is a very Greek name. (Not Jewish)
And since it's also extremely likely that since Apollos didn't know what Priscilla knew...he didn't even read Hebrew. Probably only Greek as the Septuagint was written in Greek....the same scripture translation that Timothy and Stephan used.

 

[justbyfaith]

Ummm
When you agreed that Apollos came from Alexandria you immediately lost...

(Psst, you aren't supposed to help my case so much it makes things too easy)

There is no city in Israel named Alexandria...and any city named "Alexandria" would be a Greek city. Just like Apollos is a very Greek name. (Not Jewish)
And since it's also extremely likely that since Apollos didn't know what Priscilla knew...he didn't even read Hebrew. Probably only Greek as the Septuagint was written in Greek....the same scripture translation that Timothy and Stephan used.

As I said, I was not saying that there was no evidence for your claim; but was just asking you to provide it. Thank you.

And, as I have also said; even if Apollos was a Hellenistic Jew; it does not exclude him for candidacy for the authorship of the book of Hebrews. The author of Hebrews did not describe his pedigree. And since Apollos was in fact mighty in the scriptures (Acts 18:24), he may very well have written the epistle to the Hebrews.

And therefore, even though I may concede a point, I have won the whole of the argument; since the point that is conceded really is irrelevant to the whole of the argument.

But of course you knew that. Because it is clear to me that you have been attempting to simply take up my time and energy arguing something of no intrinsic value.

 

[JohnDB]

As I said, I was not saying that there was no evidence for your claim; but was just asking you to provide it. Thank you.

And, as I have also said; even if Apollos was a Hellenistic Jew; it does not exclude him for candidacy for the authorship of the book of Hebrews. The author of Hebrews did not describe his pedigree. And since Apollos was in fact mighty in the scriptures (Acts 18:24), he may very well have written the epistle to the Hebrews.

And therefore, even though I may concede a point, I have won the whole of the argument; since the point that is conceded really is irrelevant to the whole of the argument.

But of course you knew that. Because it is clear to me that you have been attempting to simply take up my time and energy arguing something of no intrinsic value.

It is the point....
You haven't and still refuse to use basic hermeneutics to read scripture with. You are using eisogesis instead of exogesis.

Books were a very expensive commodity. Even the library (joke here) in Alexandria would not have the materials referenced by the Book of Hebrews. And since Apollos didn't ever meet the Apostles he never had the opportunity to read them. Apollos preached to the Gentiles and other Hellenistic Jews. Obviously....

But all this deduction is possible only if you get out of your own head of what you want scriptures to say and let obvious deductive reasoning take place.

And the point of a very different time, culture, and social environment is lost on you. Paul had good reasons for why he said what he said. Those reasons are mostly gone today as you yourself have provided evidence of... especially "cut straight the Gospel". You missed that one entirely. Your scholarship is so low you need to start over and begin elementary education...which is taught by women. Even Apollos was smart enough to listen to Priscilla... you haven't quite reached up to that level yet.

Also you missed on the point of "church time". Church time is whenever two or more are gathered...(Jesus quote)

Got anymore of these "great ideas" running around?

 

[justbyfaith]

Why does Paul refer to Apollos as being another teacher in the body of Christ that people were saying, "I am of Paul", or, "I am of Apollos" so that Paul had to correct them by saying that Paul planted, and Apollos watered, but God gave the increase?

How does that scripture, in 1 Corinthians 2 and 3, apply to us today?

Apart from the clear application that we are not to divide over the teachings of one man over another, I believe that it may be in reference to the fact that Apollos was in fact a man who penned holy scripture (the epistle to the Hebrews).

I know that it is purely conjecture; and my point is not that Apollos had to have definitely been its author; but what I am arguing for is the fact that the authorship of Apollos is not to be quickly ruled out.

If you would recall, my original statement was that he was traditionally mentioned as being a candidate for the authorship of Hebrews.

 

[Gardenias]

@justbyfaith
I'm surprised that you are even responding to the women in cc since your high mindedness is up there with God himself!
Sorry @Edify your thread had been hijacked as a personal platform. He is doing the same with many threads as well as his own threads!

The fall will be HARD from such loftiness!

 

[LactoseIntolerant]

I always took Ecclesiastes 7:27-28 with a grain of salt, but seeing this OP, I think the salt is not so necessary.

 

[Gardenias]

Why does Paul refer to Apollos as being another teacher in the body of Christ that people were saying, "I am of Paul", or, "I am of Apollos" so that Paul had to correct them by saying that Paul planted, and Apollos watered, but God gave the increase?

How does that scripture, in 1 Corinthians 2 and 3, apply to us today?

Apart from the clear application that we are not to divide over the teachings of one man over another, I believe that it may be in reference to the fact that Apollos was in fact a man who penned holy scripture (the epistle to the Hebrews).

I know that it is purely conjecture; and my point is not that Apollos had to have definitely been its author; but what I am arguing for is the fact that the authorship of Apollos is not to be quickly ruled out.

If you would recall, my original statement was that he was traditionally mentioned as being a candidate for the authorship of Hebrews.

Forgive this and any negative connotations I've said or implied!💜

 

[Gardenias]

To all please read my exchange in his law thread.
It will give you a better understanding and compassion towards someone who is seeking God but is blocked wholely by disease.
It cannot be helped,I've dealt with it my whole life with family members.
Yes it makes us angry and upset with their way of thinking but pray God gives us compassion and love one to another!
We may not be whole in body and mind here but there is coming a day......... ... PTL

 

[JohnDB]

Why does Paul refer to Apollos as being another teacher in the body of Christ that people were saying, "I am of Paul", or, "I am of Apollos" so that Paul had to correct them by saying that Paul planted, and Apollos watered, but God gave the increase?

How does that scripture, in 1 Corinthians 2 and 3, apply to us today?

Apart from the clear application that we are not to divide over the teachings of one man over another, I believe that it may be in reference to the fact that Apollos was in fact a man who penned holy scripture (the epistle to the Hebrews).

I know that it is purely conjecture; and my point is not that Apollos had to have definitely been its author; but what I am arguing for is the fact that the authorship of Apollos is not to be quickly ruled out.

If you would recall, my original statement was that he was traditionally mentioned as being a candidate for the authorship of Hebrews.

And any reasonable person would know that the Jews in Israel wouldn't have listened to a thing Apollos had to say based on his name alone.

Look at what they did to Stephan...

Not to mention that Apollos didn't ever go to Israel...that's obvious too.

And then the contextual clues of the book of Hebrews is that it originally was penned in Hebrew language but later translated into Latin/Greek using the Septuagint as a translation guide. Which would also agree with anthropologists general practices notations of the Jews.

There's not one single reputable scholar suggesting what you are saying. Now disreputable ones? The ones that don't know anything except how to peddle God for profit? Okay.... probably...

And because you have yet to learn the most basic of hermeneutics skills... you have bought into these quacks...possibly quacks is too nice...possibly Atheists.
And you parrot these people and depend on them for the salvation of your soul when they clearly disparage over half of the population in Heaven to begin with and hold clearly ungodly positions that deny God's very character and nature.

You need some women to help you get straight on the basics.

 

[justbyfaith]

And any reasonable person would know that the Jews in Israel wouldn't have listened to a thing Apollos had to say based on his name alone.

The author of Hebrews did not give their name.

 

[justbyfaith]

Look at what they did to Stephan...

Not to mention that Apollos didn't ever go to Israel...that's obvious too.

And then the contextual clues of the book of Hebrews is that it originally was penned in Hebrew language but later translated into Latin/Greek using the Septuagint as a translation guide. Which would also agree with anthropologists general practices notations of the Jews.

There's not one single reputable scholar suggesting what you are saying. Now disreputable ones? The ones that don't know anything except how to peddle God for profit? Okay.... probably...

And because you have yet to learn the most basic of hermeneutics skills... you have bought into these quacks...possibly quacks is too nice...possibly Atheists.
And you parrot these people and depend on them for the salvation of your soul when they clearly disparage over half of the population in Heaven to begin with and hold clearly ungodly positions that deny God's very character and nature.

I'm still at a loss as to why you feel so strongly about this issue.

What does it matter if Apollos was the author of Hebrews? Why are the scholars who teach that he was, disreputable in your opinion? Why do you call them quacks? That is emotional language.

There must be a reason for your emotions on this issue...

To me, it is so highly peripheral that I am willing to concede the argument at his point, regardless of what the real answer is.

Except that there may be an issue in your heart concerning this that the Lord wants to deal with.

 

[JohnDB]

I'm still at a loss as to why you feel so strongly about this issue.

What does it matter if Apollos was the author of Hebrews? Why are the scholars who teach that he was, disreputable in your opinion? Why do you call them quacks? That is emotional language.

There must be a reason for your emotions on this issue...

To me, it is so highly peripheral that I am willing to concede the argument at his point, regardless of what the real answer is.

Except that there may be an issue in your heart concerning this that the Lord wants to deal with.

It's not the author of Hebrews that is the issue...it's the same related thing as your suggestion that Apollos (the least likely candidate) could be the author.

Its that suggestion that demonstrates your basic lack of ability to use basic hermeneutic skills.

All the while you are using the scriptures to subjugate women.

Thats the problem.

Generally speaking:
Men are better leaders than women if things are going good well and fine. Hardwiring and generally better dispositions for the task. (Servant leadership...not demanding leadership)

But things of late (generally speaking) aren't going so well. As such God, who raises leaders or deposes them, has set up women leaders. Some are horrible...some aren't. Which is God's warning that things are not good. Especially Spiritually speaking.

Which is why Paul didn't allow women to help him teach...he was setting them up with a solid foundation that was free from such curses but yet sent Phoebe to Rome. (,Recognizing the difference yet) and yet we know that Paul eventually made it to Rome...just saying.

Today women have normal jobs and educations better than most men receive...men aren't graduating college like women are. Unlike the Ancient Near East where the usual jobs women had who weren't slaves were prostitutes. The exceptions are duly noted in scripture.

Women aren't one half step above property anymore. Sure they tend to generally be more emotional than men...but that isn't relevant. The education level is.

God hates abuse more than divorce... that's what the passage "I hate divorce" is all about in Malachi.

And subjugating women and disregarding their abilities given to them by God is abuse.

 

[justbyfaith]

It's not the author of Hebrews that is the issue...it's the same related thing as your suggestion that Apollos (the least likely candidate) could be the author.

Its that suggestion that demonstrates your basic lack of ability to use basic hermeneutic skills.

All the while you are using the scriptures to subjugate women.

Thats the problem.

Generally speaking:
Men are better leaders than women if things are going good well and fine. Hardwiring and generally better dispositions for the task. (Servant leadership...not demanding leadership)

But things of late (generally speaking) aren't going so well. As such God, who raises leaders or deposes them, has set up women leaders. Some are horrible...some aren't. Which is God's warning that things are not good. Especially Spiritually speaking.

Which is why Paul didn't allow women to help him teach...he was setting them up with a solid foundation that was free from such curses but yet sent Phoebe to Rome. (,Recognizing the difference yet) and yet we know that Paul eventually made it to Rome...just saying.

Today women have normal jobs and educations better than most men receive...men aren't graduating college like women are. Unlike the Ancient Near East where the usual jobs women had who weren't slaves were prostitutes. The exceptions are duly noted in scripture.

Women aren't one half step above property anymore. Sure they tend to generally be more emotional than men...but that isn't relevant. The education level is.

God hates abuse more than divorce... that's what the passage "I hate divorce" is all about in Malachi.

And subjugating women and disregarding their abilities given to them by God is abuse.

Even if Apollos is not the author of Hebrews (and you have not shown conclusively that he isn't), it should be clear that there isn't a woman candidate for the authorship of the book.

Unless your whole reason for rejecting the authorship of Apollos was to place some woman in his place...

Then I can see why you would feel strongly about rejecting the authorship of Apollos for the epistle.

But that a woman would have been the author is simply not very plausible, considering the atmosphere in the 1st century concerning the acceptance of women as being prominent members of society. This alone should tell you that the author of Hebrews was not a woman.

And, since I believe that the word of the Lord is timeless, I also believe that such passages as 1 Timothy 2:11-14 and 1 Corinthians 14:34-38 are also timeless.

I have quoted these passages enough times in this thread that I don't need to quote them again.

Besides, I might get a response of ZZZ from @Dino246...and we wouldn't want that, now, would we?