Are women allowed to Preach?

[eternally-gratefull]

The only reason why you are scared is because you have a bad habit of reading into what one is saying.

1. never said woman is not allowed to be a deacon
2. never said a women is not allowed speak in the church because she needs to stand by her man so the man is not tempted?
3. The word of God tells us those who have issues to marry does it not ? 1cor 7:9

The point I'm making is Yes a women can be a deacon, minster, evangelist, and leader. The word Deacon = servant I think you missed that.
"the word deacon = servant that all. many miss some very important truths about the servant, deacon, minster and it is in the word of God ."

Can a women be a servant of God? Yes. can a women be a deacon yes she can. That being said a husband and wife team in the service does help prevent foolishness. I'm minster I have a wife of 27 years, One wife. Unlike many who are on wife two and three. I don't go and visit a married women home without the husband being there that is called respect. OR my wife is with me. There is more than just trusting a person it is called "to void the very appearance of evil" 1thess 5:22 . I have staff many of them women my wife can come to my office anytime and so can thier husbands , we do not take lunches together without my wife.

Your exmple of the running away deacons is missing soe very important facts.

were either of them married ? If they were why was he working so close to another women that was not his wife? And why would i say it is the womans Fault?

"Men who are in leadership should be following god, if they are following God they should not be tempted. "

Your point here is not biblical sir, No one followed God more than Jesus and guess what HE was tempted.

All men will be tempted. The Bible show us we will be tempted the two reason why 1. God is testing you 2. your lust has control over you. many men followed God and were tempted. Joseph is one that comes to mind. David is another.

Maturity is neded. and it is lacking with many.

If you would have read my post. you would have seen that only thing I was scared about was the fact you said men need a wife to keep them from being tempted.

I am glad you do not believe a woman is forbade to be a deacon. I said I could be incorect. and you proved that I was, thank you.

As for the situation. The pastor lived next to the church, People came to the church building to do things all the time, all times of the day (clean, set up for the next Sunday, do maintenance) The pastor was usually in his office, and ANYONE could come into his office and have conversations. Most likely things happened off campus. not on campus. I am not going to judge, I was young, and do not know the facts. I only know we lost two good deacons (the man who's wife did this, and his brother and his brothers wife both left the church) and the church took years to recover.

This pastor was the first pastor to expose us to Greek. He did not just do 20 minute sermons. but actually did a word by word study of the bible. Everyone was amazed of his power of the word. Most likely this is why people were shocked when it happens. because they felt this man must be very mature in his faith to be able to have that much knowledge, which just proved, knowledge alone does not mean much (Sadly I did not get this until later in life.)

 

[loyaldisciple]

Does your arrogance know no bounds? You are a dictator at heart. You demand complete control, your way in everything. You even demand the right to dictate your own ground rules for a conversation. Then you have the bare-faced cheek to lecture others about submission!

LOL. That is extremely funny Lucy that you qualify someone as a "dictator" simply because they like to believe exactly as the Bible says AND when they answer questions they naturally expect that their questions are answered also. Seems rather normal to me actually, but if you say that makes one a "dictator" then surely we should all believe you. Just add one more name to the long list of names I've been called here already for posting the true word of God. No big deal, I think it's probably up to 10 or 12 slanderous names I've been called now by you and your loving friends.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Originally Posted by Lucy-Pevensie

Does your arrogance know no bounds?

LOL. That is extremely funny Lucy that you qualify someone as a "dictator" simply because they like to believe exactly as the Bible says AND when they answer questions they naturally expect that their questions are answered also. Seems rather normal to me actually, but if you say that makes one a "dictator" then surely we should all believe you. Just add one more name to the long list of names I've been called here already for posting the true word of God. No big deal, I think it's probably up to 10 or 12 slanderous names I've been called now by you and your loving friends.

I think you can see he answered yes.

Its his way or the highway, If you believe as he does. you believe scripture. If not. You reject scripture

that is dictatorship 101

 

[loyaldisciple]

I think you can see he answered yes.

Its his way or the highway, If you believe as he does. you believe scripture. If not. You reject scripture

that is dictatorship 101

You people should start to understand that when I post the scripture those are not my words. Several people here keep acting like it is me saying those things. Not true. It is GOD that has said those words. It is your own denial of His word that makes you angry and do not want to go by them and causes you to insult those who post them. It is your own disobedience that backfires on you and makes you so upset. You haven't seen me calling people on here a bunch of nasty names, yet plenty have been slung my way.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

You people should start to understand that when I post the scripture those are not my words. Several people here keep acting like it is me saying those things. Not true. It is GOD that has said those words. It is your own denial of His word that makes you angry and do not want to go by them and causes you to insult those who post them. It is your own disobedience that backfires on you and makes you so upset. You haven't seen me calling people on here a bunch of nasty names, yet plenty have been slung my way.

You need to understand that when the pharisee quoted scripture (and they could quote the whole OT) that does not mean THEY UNDERSTOOD what scripture was saying (they proved they did not by rejection Christ)

Just because you post it does not mean you KNOW IT. Interpretation is the issue. Not the scripture.

People call you the things they do because of your arrogance that you think just because you post a passage, You think you know what it means, and if they do not agree with you. they are in error.

 

[joefizz]

Does the verse say it is only for any specific time period ? That is more opinion and speculation. It doesn't say that anywhere in those verses. So, are you suggesting that what was best for the churches then is somehow not best for churches now ? You can have that opinion and make that suggestion if you choose but that is all that it is, opinion, suggestion and speculation.

Can you show me a verse explaining the exact reasons for his words ? Again this is simply opinion and speculation. When you cannot provide an actual verse in the BIBLE that discounts what Paul has said applies to all churches, then you have zero biblical basis to support your argument. All you have is your own speculation and opinion. As I said before, I am not dealing with opinion here. I have provided the exact scripture of what the BIBLE says, and yes it is very clear.

Where does it say anything in the verse about "interruption". It doesn't say that at all. Again this is more speculation on your part. He simply says for the women are not to speak. Yes, he does finish by saying all things should be done decently and in order. And the way he proposed for that to happen was by the women remaining silent which he had already thoroughly explained. And again Paul does nothing to say these instructions are limited unto any certain church or churches. Again more speculation and opinion. And YOU are speaking to someone about taking things "out of context" while adding all of this opinion and speculation into your argument ? How clever, but it won't work here. And finally you reach the truth at the end. Paul spoke "what many did not want to hear". And this whole thread is proving exactly that. Paul spoke the truth that many do not want to hear. So they sit and argue until the sun comes up desperately attempting to somehow discount his words. And they fail miserably each and every time. But still they try because the truth they do not want to hear.

I'm surprised anyone takes you "seriously" I can't considering how open and shut your analyzing is.

 

[joefizz]

I think you can see he answered yes.

Its his way or the highway, If you believe as he does. you believe scripture. If not. You reject scripture

that is dictatorship 101

Hi Eg what are your thoughts on the subject of this thread?(so many posts that it would take awhile to back track)

 

[joefizz]

Nope. I NEVER said that at all. I identified his letter of instruction as the letter to the church in Corinth

BUT I NEVER said or implied his teaching and instruction were limited to that church only

as we all know there is truly only ONE BODY/CHURCH

and that BODY consists of many members.

Women also!

Yep and as I recall as I have mentioned before Paul said women were the "backbone" of any church.

 

[loyaldisciple]

I'm surprised anyone takes you "seriously" I can't considering how open and shut your analyzing is.

The verses I have quoted ARE an open and shut case and that case was decided by God Himself, not by me. Anyone that believes any differently is not obeying the scripture as it is written.

 

[loyaldisciple]

You need to understand that when the pharisee quoted scripture (and they could quote the whole OT) that does not mean THEY UNDERSTOOD what scripture was saying (they proved they did not by rejection Christ)

Just because you post it does not mean you KNOW IT. Interpretation is the issue. Not the scripture.

People call you the things they do because of your arrogance that you think just because you post a passage, You think you know what it means, and if they do not agree with you. they are in error.

It is those who sit for days denying the word of God that have rejected Him. It is not those who are obeying His word that lack any understanding. The verses posted are in need of zero "interpretation", as they are crystal clear already. The problem is that many simply do not wish to follow them, so they become angry and lash out at the messenger. Some here are very comfortable in their false beliefs to the extent that when truth shows up they reject it with a passion. Slinging their insults around and their sarcasm and anything else they can think of in order to deny the truth that has been set before them.

 

[joefizz]

The verses I have quoted ARE an open and shut case and that case was decided by God Himself, not by me. Anyone that believes any differently is not obeying the scripture as it is written.

"If the blind lead the blind surely they shall fall into the ditch together",no thanks I'll follow the bible in whole "not portion" and be "open to learning" and not think of the bible as "plain or simple" always keeping in mind that the Holy spirit can teach truth of scriptures if one gets self out of the way that is.

 

[Angela53510]

Would someone (like Angela) provide the Greek translation of the scriptures which state.

CHRIST ascended and led captivity in HIS TRAIN and gave gifts to men

I’d be curious about whether that meant men only

Well, HeRose beat me to it! The Greek says:

“[FONT=&quot]διὸ λέγει· Ἀναβὰς εἰς ὕψος ᾐχμαλώτευσεν αἰχμαλωσίαν, [/FONT][FONT=&quot]ἔδωκεν δόματα τοῖς ἀνθρώποις.” Eph. 4:8[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]“[/FONT][FONT=&quot]This is why it says:[/FONT][FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]“When he ascended on high,
he took many captives
and gave gifts to his people” Eph. 4:8 NIV[/FONT]
[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
So anthropos [FONT=&quot][/FONT][FONT=&quot]ἀνθρώποις[/FONT][FONT=&quot] is consistently used by Paul and other Biblical writers when they want to include everyone. If it said aner, that would be men only. There is another word for “male” I forget what it is, it is not often used.

The NIV is the only version I looked at (there may be others that used it, that I didn’t look at) that says “people.“ There are two reasons for this.

1. Tradition - new Bible translations, like the ESV specifically (my Greek prof was on the original committee, and this “all new” version, was told to keep the KJV “traditions” as they were important too! In other words, it didn’t matter what the Greek and Hebrew said!)

2. Changes to English. Up until a few years ago, say 20, in English, men/brothers was inclusive of women/sisters. That is the way Greek works! Koine Greek has not changed, it is set in concrete, being a dead language, and it is known that terms like [/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT][FONT=&quot]ἀνθρώποις[/FONT][FONT=&quot] - translated as “men” meant “men and women.” So, now, all the people that claim feminists are destroying society, have jumped on that language change in English to prove women are excluded from salvation, as I believe LoyalD did in the beginning of this thread. Or, maybe someone else.

Ironic that some people so want to cling to old translations (which is their right!) but then want to used the redefined feminists versions of modern English. Either keep the old meanings, if you want to use an old translation, or switch to a version that translates it into modern English properly!

Got it?
Men includes women in a version like the KJV. That is how English used to work.
If you want the redefined very modern English, a proper translation of anthropos is people, NOT men!

You simply cannot have it both ways!
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

 

[miknik5]

Does the verse say it is only for any specific time period ? That is more opinion and speculation. It doesn't say that anywhere in those verses. So, are you suggesting that what was best for the churches then is somehow not best for churches now ? You can have that opinion and make that suggestion if you choose but that is all that it is, opinion, suggestion and speculation.

Can you show me a verse explaining the exact reasons for his words ? Again this is simply opinion and speculation. When you cannot provide an actual verse in the BIBLE that discounts what Paul has said applies to all churches, then you have zero biblical basis to support your argument. All you have is your own speculation and opinion. As I said before, I am not dealing with opinion here. I have provided the exact scripture of what the BIBLE says, and yes it is very clear.

1

Where does it say anything in the verse about "interruption". It doesn't say that at all. Again this is more speculation on your part. He simply says for the women are not to speak. Yes, he does finish by saying all things should be done decently and in order. And the way he proposed for that to happen was by the women remaining silent which he had already thoroughly explained.


2

And again Paul does nothing to say these instructions are limited unto any certain church or churches. Again more speculation and opinion.

2
(And neither has anyone else)

And YOU are speaking to someone about taking things "out of context" while adding all of this opinion and speculation into your argument ? How clever, but it won't work here. And finally you reach the truth at the end. Paul spoke "what many did not want to hear". And this whole thread is proving exactly that. Paul spoke the truth that many do not want to hear. So they sit and argue until the sun comes up desperately attempting to somehow discount his words. And they fail miserably each and every time. But still they try because the truth they do not want to hear.

1
Tell me sir.

What do you suppose came first?

the letter from Paul
not the issues within the new and just learning baby churches?

 

[garee]

it is not a requirement. And a deacon can do wonders without a wife. I see it all the time.

The office of deacons made up of men deacons and women deacons is not without wife and children who as a unit prove the requirements to council others in order to be a good example to the flock working as one in respect to godly council .It a family affair. Not given to one individual. They working as one earn their respect.

All of the requirements must be made or none

Deacons in like manner must be grave, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre; holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience. And let these also first be proved; then let them serve as deacons, if they be blameless. Women in like manner must be grave, not slanderers, temperate, faithful in all things. Let deacons be husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. For they that have served well as deacons gain to themselves a good standing, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus. 1Ti 3:8

There is no understanding in respect to a single one that owns that position.Those two working together can provide single ministry as helper .But they cannot hold the office of a deacon.

 

[garee]

LOL. That is extremely funny Lucy that you qualify someone as a "dictator" simply because they like to believe exactly as the Bible says AND when they answer questions they naturally expect that their questions are answered also. LOL. That is extremely funny Lucy that you qualify someone as a "dictator" simply because they like to believe exactly as the Bible says AND when they answer questions they naturally expect that their questions are answered also.

I think you bring that on your own self. You beleive exactly what you think His interpreation is teaching you just as any other person that has a heresy as a private interpretation to offer.

God is not served by human hands as that which represents the will.He put his words in their mouths, they preach Christ. Not male or female( themselves).To accredit it as the faith that comes from hearing God to men or woman is the balpheme the Holy Spirit who does make us differnt. No self made man when it comes to Christianity.

Wonder women.... yes.LOL

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

Read leviticus 6, 11 (but maby is only meant the brand sacrifice)

6:11 doesn't refer to eating the sacrifice...I'm really not following you at all.

 

[miknik5]

1
Tell me sir.

What do you suppose came first?

the letter from Paul
Or the issues within the new and just learning baby churches?

Correction made to my above post in red

 

[miknik5]

You can sit and argue all night and you are not going to find one single verse within the BIBLE to discount what Paul said in 1 Corinthians 14:34-14:35. The reason you cannot find it is because it is not there.

I was actually going to respond to your post here regarding the truth that it is you who offer one single verse and neglect the whole of the context of the letter to the churches (every letter to every one of the churches) but I see joe already mentioned it

just as you wouldn’t and couldn’t read a portion of a book, poem or any writing for that matter and then offer just one single snippet as the whole theme of the story to a professor or any other who has read in total that book, poem, writing... the same applies here with the word of GOD sir

Those who read in context and remember the whole of the letter, from beginning to end, will know

 

[preacher4truth]

You people should start to understand that when I post the scripture those are not my words.

lolzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

 

[miknik5]

Please go back and read the whole of the letter

and understand it was the issues that came first that caused Paul to write these letters
Paul wasn't laying down ground rules so as to avoid the possibilities of the calling outs, they were already happening

both the sisters and brothers were corrected about it

just as the beginning of the letter states