-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
There's this argument going on that women preachers were called by God. Does that mean everyone who stands in front of a pulpit is automatically chosen? Or is this just the logic you apply to women preachers? Just because someone stands up and speaks, does not make them chosen by God.
Satan deceived the woman. The first sin ever committed was a direct defiance of God's word after it was spoken directly to the people who defied it, committed by a woman. The second was a deception of the man and of God, committed by a woman. The third was trying to hide and cover tracks, lying to God and lying to the self, committed by both parties. Adam told the truth when God asked him what happened, he didn't say 'No, God, I never ate from the tree', he said 'The woman told me to eat, and I ate', but God cast Him out with the woman, as they are one, and the responsibility lies with both parties regardless of who did the deceiving. Then God put Adam in charge and as hierarchically superior to the woman.
This says a lot about modern times. The woman says 'But it's ok, I know it's ok to eat this fruit' (to preach), and swindles others into believing the same thing. Then the man says 'yea, well maybe it is ok', and also eats. It is a deception.
Satan deceived the woman. The first sin ever committed was a direct defiance of God's word after it was spoken directly to the people who defied it, committed by a woman. The second was a deception of the man and of God, committed by a woman. The third was trying to hide and cover tracks, lying to God and lying to the self, committed by both parties. Adam told the truth when God asked him what happened, he didn't say 'No, God, I never ate from the tree', he said 'The woman told me to eat, and I ate', but God cast Him out with the woman, as they are one, and the responsibility lies with both parties regardless of who did the deceiving. Then God put Adam in charge and as hierarchically superior to the woman.
This says a lot about modern times. The woman says 'But it's ok, I know it's ok to eat this fruit' (to preach), and swindles others into believing the same thing. Then the man says 'yea, well maybe it is ok', and also eats. It is a deception.
is that all you can answer with? Please use scripture to back up your argument, like I have, and address the things I have pointed out.
As with many people it is simply called whatever you choose to call it. When I use reason from the Word it is against the commandments from the New Testament conveniently selected by those too weak to consider all the Word as one overall guide to being born, living and living more. I believe from the Word, and I also see those who will not follow the Master's teaching to obey God, deciding new commandments as though from Him. Paul, in his epistle is speaking to a specific group with customs similar to his own, and he is giving his personal practice, which is his custom and tradition, when he states, "I do not allow a woman etc." The Word does not exempt good grammar.
At this point, further allegations and charges of what is and is not concerning this commandment is simply contention. This is my honest belief in the sight of Jesus Christ, Yeshua, and I will never try to deny the presence of the Holy Spirit in the speech of anyone.
At this point, further allegations and charges of what is and is not concerning this commandment is simply contention. This is my honest belief in the sight of Jesus Christ, Yeshua, and I will never try to deny the presence of the Holy Spirit in the speech of anyone.
I'm glad THAT's the only argument you have now. Bravo. But address my comments and we'll have a proper discussion...
Yet Timothy is not addressing people with 'similar customs'. He lays out a law based on the deception of Eve. That very logic that he uses would make that law applicable to all followers, unless you don't believe in Eve of course. Moses spoke to people with customs similar to his own. Does that make his laws only effective to a small number? Jesus spoke to small groups at times. As did all the Apostles.
'I will never try to deny the presence of the Holy Spirit in the speech of anyone'.
'It is against the commandments from the New Testament conveniently selected by those too weak to consider all the Word as one overall guide to obey God'.
It is not contention whenever Paul isn't the only one who speaks on the matter. Did we ever see a woman stand up and preach to men in the New Testament? Jesus must have had very similar customs and social patterns to Paul . . hmmm.
'I will never try to deny the presence of the Holy Spirit in the speech of anyone'.
'It is against the commandments from the New Testament conveniently selected by those too weak to consider all the Word as one overall guide to obey God'.
It is not contention whenever Paul isn't the only one who speaks on the matter. Did we ever see a woman stand up and preach to men in the New Testament? Jesus must have had very similar customs and social patterns to Paul . . hmmm.
Again running to the Old Testament full of the Torah of Yahweh, laws, statutes and ordinances, denied by many because grace has replaced them according to them being blinded to the truth of the Master, they are simply fulfilled and will never be abolished, yet finding new laws and commandments in the new testament these same who have not heard from God to enforce them, are doing just that. So on the one hand, when Jesus instructs us to obey and teach the laws according to His own example, it is perfectly fine to ignore it, but when a school of thought barring segments of the Body of Christ from speaking votes on a concept received erroneously or perhaps rightly from the Word, then they issue a new Commandment. Not consulting the Father in so doing is a grave error. The Master in teaching us by His own example desires mercy and not sacrifice. Now, perhaps some here are passing the time in idle banter so remember this, again, this is what I believe in the sight of God. All the clever wordings and rearranging of the Word is not going to convince me otherwise, however words accompanied by the Holy Spirit most certainly will.
'I have not come to abolish the law. I have come to fulfill it' And I am sorry, but the commandment you speak of me issuing, actually comes from the New Testament. And it is Timothy himself, (as a prophet), not I, who speaks of the deception of Eve and of the reasons why women shouldn't teach. I am running nowhere.
This is in response to all who make this declaration that it is a commandment that a woman not share the Word of Yahweh, if you wish it to be personal, then perhaps you have your reasons. God has not commanded anyone I know to not allow a person led by the Holy Spirit to share the Good News of Jesus Christ, Yeshua.......
B
Well by all means, I've asked you to use scripture to back up your claims. If you have any proof that God said in other places that women preachers are ok... then please show it. All you've sufficiently produced are scriptures saying the Holy Spirit can be on both men and women. No argument there. You've spoken of modern women and their ministries. Great. So show some scripture to back your claims.
Otherwise, please do not twist the Word - or in your own words 'reason' it out...
Otherwise, please do not twist the Word - or in your own words 'reason' it out...