Woman position ( 1 Corinthians 14:34-37)

[Elin]

The NT word of God doesn't "nullify" itself.

Elin,
I know it doesn't. But that's how a member used Galatians 3. Did you read the posts before you responded to my question about Galatians 3 and how then would it apply to 1 Timothy 3?

I don't know to which posts you are referring.

The member used Galatians 3 to try and show or prove 1 Corinthians does not mean women are to keep silent....Well, that is true, then how does Galatians 3 apply to 1 Timothy 3?

I was asking the member for clarification.

It is not true, and Gal 3 has nothing to do with 1Tim 3.

Deacons in the assembly were to be full of the Spirit and wisdom (Ac 6:3) and were ordained to service (Ac 6:6).
Women are excluded from leadership in the assembly.

Gal 3 has nothing to do with women being in leadership nor speaking or not speaking in the assembly.

 

[realchild4life]

Just so you know, you can also put people on ignore and then change your mind. So, it too can be temporary.

(I just un-ignored a few folks a few minutes ago. lol)

I think that would be going to far, I'd have to run into someone more evil than me to do that.

 

[atwhatcost]

8 For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man.9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man......how can a woman be obedient...if she is constantly contending for a mans role and position...including within the home...how can there be one head if a man is consistently having to fight for and defend his position...If a man is being obedient to his role...the purpose of his creation unto Christ.....so should a woman...without pitching a fit thinking "I can do it too, cuz I wanna!" It's not suppose to be a competition or a woman trying to prove anything except her obedience to the Lord within the purpose of her creation....Even Deborah herself knew it wasn't suppose to be the way it turned out....This is why she is in Judges...Israel was being JUDGED for the men being sinful...Honestly....what is it some women got to prove to anybody...sounds like daddy issues...still serving their earthly father instead of their Heavenly one.....Its about as attractive as a man saying I can grow my hair long and dye it purdy too...SEE....I am an individual...nobodies the boss of me....(what point did that dude prove except rebellion in a childish manner)

I am submissive to hubby. I am not less than hubby. Therefore, there is no contending for a role.

Here's how that works out in our household. I am the checkbook balancer, bill payer, best-deal-getter for insurances, phones and any other services we'll be spending money more than once, and taxes-deal-with-er. I get the car inspected, make sure yearly forms are filled out and returned in a timely way. I am the one he consults with if he wants to buy something relatively expensive, not because he needs my permission, but he needs to know if we have the money to afford the expense. If I spend more than $20 on something not-bill-related or not-household-purposed, I ask. ("Should we buy the Narnia series on DVD?" "Mind if I buy some new jammies?")

I'm also gifted in getting through to people we need to get through to, when it seems like nothing but message machines that never get anywhere. (He too is disabled, so can't do jury duty. Tried to respond to the summons online, which simply defaults to "there is no excuse. Come." So I had to find the right person he could talk to, so he wouldn't be arrested for not going. And my chair is broken, the company promised to fix it, but SNAFU-ed up the wazoo, but I talked to the right people to resolve that. It's an odd gift, but if I need to get something done when first-tier help desks simply say No, I can find the one who will say Yes.)

I also am the laundry-doer, the take-out-the-trash-er, Dessert Chef, and I'm the Chief Bottle Washer 70% of the time.

He is the 3-5 Star Master Chef and Griller. When the meals doesn't turn out good, it's only worth 3-stars, but, man! He can so cook. We had shrimp in a mushroom, scallions and tomatoes (both from our garden) on store-bought gnocchi last night. (He's made sweet-potato gnocchi, but sometimes it's just easier to use store-bought.) It was definitely 5-star all the way! He's also the frig and cabinet cleaner, and we share who gets stuck cleaning the stove and/or oven. And, if I take on a big project that is too big for me, he pitches in to help. (A rusty grill had to go in the trash. I thought it would fall apart enough that I could handle it. It didn't, so hubby stepped in to help. And the garden box for our tomatoes got a gash in the bottom, so he took over to replace it. Ever try to lift three tomato plants in the middle of summer -- soil included? lol)

The rest of the chores and household responsibilities were negotiated long ago, under the "if it bothers you, do something about it" clause. lol

Because of that, I didn't get the first half of what you wrote. (Even got a bit lost on the scripture, since I don't know where it's from, but that's on me. lol) There doesn't have to be strict male/female roles in the home. It's not really like men have to deal with bills and women have to cook. It's what works to the strength of the two in the marriage. And, if it can't be negotiated, and, if it can't be voted as consensus, then the husband gets the final vote.

Given the wife and husband are always submitting to God, (hey, and we really can't slough on that one, since the spouse has to rely on that submitting for it to work), the husband loves the wife like Christ loves his Church, and the woman submits and loves the husband, it's not an employer-employee relationship. It's a partnership, with God as the boss.

 

[atwhatcost]

Oh, you wrote: "So, like the words in the Bible don't count?" Count...read Numbers! Just being silly. Ridiculous. I know.

Ah, man! I thought I could answer something with recent knowledge on the subject for a change. lol

 

[MarcR]

My previous comment bears repeating. From now on whenever I read a ridiculous comment harping about Christian women not having the authority in Christ Jesus to speak or teach, I am going to repost my comment above. Over & over & over.

Why in the world would someone become a member of a Christian chat/forum group which in the rules states it's just fine for both men and women to teach, preach and speak? If you think it's a sin, don't join this group. Am I right? Does that make sense?

While the forum is undoubtedly supposed to be a Christian assembly; it is not by any stretch of the imagination a church; therefore any restriction on women speaking would not apply.

Whatever one thinks of that restriction; it is certainly not based on ability or quality of her contribution to a discussion.

 

[Gr8grace]

I am submissive to hubby. I am not less than hubby. Therefore, there is no contending for a role.

Here's how that works out in our household. I am the checkbook balancer, bill payer, best-deal-getter for insurances, phones and any other services we'll be spending money more than once, and taxes-deal-with-er. I get the car inspected, make sure yearly forms are filled out and returned in a timely way. I am the one he consults with if he wants to buy something relatively expensive, not because he needs my permission, but he needs to know if we have the money to afford the expense. If I spend more than $20 on something not-bill-related or not-household-purposed, I ask. ("Should we buy the Narnia series on DVD?" "Mind if I buy some new jammies?")

I'm also gifted in getting through to people we need to get through to, when it seems like nothing but message machines that never get anywhere. (He too is disabled, so can't do jury duty. Tried to respond to the summons online, which simply defaults to "there is no excuse. Come." So I had to find the right person he could talk to, so he wouldn't be arrested for not going. And my chair is broken, the company promised to fix it, but SNAFU-ed up the wazoo, but I talked to the right people to resolve that. It's an odd gift, but if I need to get something done when first-tier help desks simply say No, I can find the one who will say Yes.)

I also am the laundry-doer, the take-out-the-trash-er, Dessert Chef, and I'm the Chief Bottle Washer 70% of the time.

He is the 3-5 Star Master Chef and Griller. When the meals doesn't turn out good, it's only worth 3-stars, but, man! He can so cook. We had shrimp in a mushroom, scallions and tomatoes (both from our garden) on store-bought gnocchi last night. (He's made sweet-potato gnocchi, but sometimes it's just easier to use store-bought.) It was definitely 5-star all the way! He's also the frig and cabinet cleaner, and we share who gets stuck cleaning the stove and/or oven. And, if I take on a big project that is too big for me, he pitches in to help. (A rusty grill had to go in the trash. I thought it would fall apart enough that I could handle it. It didn't, so hubby stepped in to help. And the garden box for our tomatoes got a gash in the bottom, so he took over to replace it. Ever try to lift three tomato plants in the middle of summer -- soil included? lol)

The rest of the chores and household responsibilities were negotiated long ago, under the "if it bothers you, do something about it" clause. lol

Because of that, I didn't get the first half of what you wrote. (Even got a bit lost on the scripture, since I don't know where it's from, but that's on me. lol) There doesn't have to be strict male/female roles in the home. It's not really like men have to deal with bills and women have to cook. It's what works to the strength of the two in the marriage. And, if it can't be negotiated, and, if it can't be voted as consensus, then the husband gets the final vote.

Given the wife and husband are always submitting to God, (hey, and we really can't slough on that one, since the spouse has to rely on that submitting for it to work), the husband loves the wife like Christ loves his Church, and the woman submits and loves the husband, it's not an employer-employee relationship. It's a partnership, with God as the boss.

From my experience we get hung up on a couple words.......submit and authority. Most of us have a tendency to look at authority as power, and we have to submit to a higher power. When in reality, authority does not mean power. It means responsibility.

Jesus Christ is responsible for me, so I need to submit to His leadership or authority over me. A true leader doesn't look for submission, a true leader is responsible in His duties that he has been given.

IMO, we have a bunch of wimpy males(not men) in our society and won't carry out their responsibilities. We have a society of moms that have taken the roles of mom and dad. Because the males(not men)won't step up to the plate and be MEN.

And now we are far enough into it that these males, that had no MANLY influence are growing up and having more influence in our society.

The devils knows.......you break up the proper Godly order of family, everything else will implode.

 

[MarcR]

I have a question for you. This is not an attack. I am genuinely curious what you think here.

If this is how far you will take this, what happens outside of the assembly? I have been the boss to men before. (Maintenance department for a property management company, just so you know what kind of position it was.) What happens, if they were believers? Should I not have been their boss?

As I understand the restriction in role, it only applies to preaching, teaching men (doctrine), or Church governance.

All other leadership roles would be open to her.

 

[MarcR]

n 1Tim chapters 2 and 3, Titus Chapter1, and 1Cor 14:34; Paul teaches that women should be excluded from preaching teaching and governing roles in the church.

Since these are the only three occurrences of this teaching; it seems legitimate to question whether Paul was addressing a local problem which was common to Crete, Corinth, and Ephesus; or if he were teaching a general principle.

I do not see Scriptural or historical evidence that Paul was addressing a local issue.


I believe in the Scriptural premise that God prefers male leadership in the pastorate, the pulpit, and the church governing board.

It is evident that this does NOT mean that God can't use a woman in these roles; because He in fact does.

It is evident that there are women in the pastorate whose church members show clear evidence of salvation and Spiritual growth under her leadership.

This, IMO, does NOT negate the principle; however, if God is not pleased with them acting in their roles; it is His responsibility, not mine, to call it to their attention----and He is certainly able to do so.

 

[atwhatcost]

From my experience we get hung up on a couple words.......submit and authority. Most of us have a tendency to look at authority as power, and we have to submit to a higher power. When in reality, authority does not mean power. It means responsibility.

Jesus Christ is responsible for me, so I need to submit to His leadership or authority over me. A true leader doesn't look for submission, a true leader is responsible in His duties that he has been given.

IMO, we have a bunch of wimpy males(not men) in our society and won't carry out their responsibilities. We have a society of moms that have taken the roles of mom and dad. Because the males(not men)won't step up to the plate and be MEN.

And now we are far enough into it that these males, that had no MANLY influence are growing up and having more influence in our society.

The devils knows.......you break up the proper Godly order of family, everything else will implode.

Strange thing I learned about leadership when I was the boss of some men. (I was also the assistant maintenance manager, so I wasn't the boss of that department.) Whenever people do what they're supposed to do, then we can stop worrying about who the leader is. Only twice did the men have to be reminded I was their boss. (Common sense should have dictated you don't call your female boss at 11 AM to say you're running late because you picked up a woman in a bar and spent the night with her, but alcohol was involved and obviously he wasn't used to using such levels of common sense. lol) Outside of those two times, we all did our jobs without the expectation of behaving right only in front of the boss.

I think it works the same with Jesus. Because he teaches us to do our jobs, we don't have to see him as the boss, quite as much as a brother. He's still Lord. He really is the boss, but he's brother too. I'd rather face him with my labor completed, than face him to tell him I got lucky at a bar the night before.

 

[Gozinia]

@ Atwhatcost...SNAFU'D up the wazoo ...hahaha so cute...Your description sounds as it should be in the home....you are good at many things and your husband agrees with you to be administrator of those duties...You two sound like oxen equally pulling the yoke of lifes experiences together....YET you willingly acknowledge he is the head of the Partnership...You ASK his permission to spend money on extra things for example so you don't bring hardship upon the both of you by just doing so "cuz you wanna and he will have to deal with it"....You are a great role model in these aspects.....I have a friend who him and his wife are both Christian...He buys her a nice Toyota Landcruiser all loaded and a few months later she is complaining...Ugh I had a chevy Tahoe once and it was just my favorite vehicle ...He is like...What's wrong with the Landcruiser? But she kept at it...He has enough hearing it so he sells The nicer newer Landcruiser and buys an older higher mileage Tahoe just so she will be quiet about the whole thing(notice the emotionally led decision posed against the logical one)....Never mind the decision for the Landcruiser because of a better Rep, less maintenance, lower mileage and will be better in the long run. He comes over to my house and 10 mins later she is calling, how long you gonna be, oh ok, its just ugh I got laundry and I got to get the baby to sleep soon and I gotta do the dishes and I I I I I.....and I hear him going yeah yeah yeah ok ok....I ask him afterward......if she cant live 10 mins without you how do you get work done on your job? He kind of rolls his eyes and says...wellll she texts me pretty often while Im working too....I'm thinking seriously? Is that What married life is like? I see women making some big point to be firefighters, police officers, Military...thats all fine ....she can do what a man can do....except ......I don't care...I'm not impressed....What would impress me is women who take on the role of being keepers of the home without diminishing themselves for it....like my buddies wife...if she could do that.....without having to voice every little task as if she was complaining about it and cannot handle it.....that would be being a helper...Made for man as opposed to made for herself...I see too many women today thinking they were made for themselves and the man has to just deal with it....and when that attitude carries on into the last thing they should be doing, as if it is a quest to conquer....the last frontier ...TO BE PASTOR over the Church....just because they were told they cant and have to prove something......Again...just because a woman could...I don't care...because I'm not impressed by it. Not because of my own beliefs or am chauvenist...but Because God said so...I notice many women look around and ask where are the men of God....I would submit we're staying back with a ten foot pole from anyone who tries to resemble masculinity in action trying to be equal....but doing so by an emotionally led decision....Again thank you for your great example of what a home should be like

 

[Elin]

I am submissive to hubby. I am not less than hubby. Therefore, there is no contending for a role.

Here's how that works out in our household. I am the checkbook balancer, bill payer, best-deal-getter for insurances, phones and any other services we'll be spending money more than once, and taxes-deal-with-er. I get the car inspected, make sure yearly forms are filled out and returned in a timely way. I am the one he consults with if he wants to buy something relatively expensive, not because he needs my permission, but he needs to know if we have the money to afford the expense. If I spend more than $20 on something not-bill-related or not-household-purposed, I ask. ("Should we buy the Narnia series on DVD?" "Mind if I buy some new jammies?")

I'm also gifted in getting through to people we need to get through to, when it seems like nothing but message machines that never get anywhere. (He too is disabled, so can't do jury duty. Tried to respond to the summons online, which simply defaults to "there is no excuse. Come." So I had to find the right person he could talk to, so he wouldn't be arrested for not going. And my chair is broken, the company promised to fix it, but SNAFU-ed up the wazoo, but I talked to the right people to resolve that. It's an odd gift, but if I need to get something done when first-tier help desks simply say No, I can find the one who will say Yes.)

I also am the laundry-doer, the take-out-the-trash-er, Dessert Chef, and I'm the Chief Bottle Washer 70% of the time.

He is the 3-5 Star Master Chef and Griller. When the meals doesn't turn out good, it's only worth 3-stars, but, man! He can so cook. We had shrimp in a mushroom, scallions and tomatoes (both from our garden) on store-bought gnocchi last night. (He's made sweet-potato gnocchi, but sometimes it's just easier to use store-bought.) It was definitely 5-star all the way! He's also the frig and cabinet cleaner, and we share who gets stuck cleaning the stove and/or oven. And, if I take on a big project that is too big for me, he pitches in to help. (A rusty grill had to go in the trash. I thought it would fall apart enough that I could handle it. It didn't, so hubby stepped in to help. And the garden box for our tomatoes got a gash in the bottom, so he took over to replace it. Ever try to lift three tomato plants in the middle of summer -- soil included? lol)

The rest of the chores and household responsibilities were negotiated long ago, under the "if it bothers you, do something about it" clause. lol

Because of that, I didn't get the first half of what you wrote. (Even got a bit lost on the scripture, since I don't know where it's from, but that's on me. lol) There doesn't have to be strict male/female roles in the home. It's not really like men have to deal with bills and women have to cook. It's what works to the strength of the two in the marriage. And, if it can't be negotiated, and, if it can't be voted as consensus, then the husband gets the final vote.

Given the wife and husband are always submitting to God, (hey, and we really can't slough on that one, since the spouse has to rely on that submitting for it to work), the husband loves the wife like Christ loves his Church, and the woman submits and loves the husband, it's not an employer-employee relationship. It's a partnership, with God as the boss.

The woman can do all the home decision making and more if that is what the husband wants.

Usually the husband and wife are in agreement about who does what based on the way they choose to do things.
It's for the marriage to decide.

 

[Gozinia]

To help clarify so i don't appear to demean women as a gender....I think its great for men and women both to have goals and fulfill them...what I was trying to point out is the so called women's right movement has progressed to where it shouldn't be today....and gives little credit to Gods order in life....God has an order and it shouldn't be disrupted....Apologies for my long post although I hoped it may provide what I see in the world today.....Being a keeper of the home is one of the most demanding, humble and noble of dutiful occupations and women should be commended for it.....Many men do things as a sense of duty and obedience unto the Lord...and when a woman does the same it is very admirable...No wait...actually Beautiful

 

[MarcR]

The music portion of the service is conducted by what is called a worship leader in some assemblies.

Women are not to appear to be in authority over men in the assembly.
To lead the assembly in music would be leadership, in my opinion.

What think ye, oldhermit and Marc?

As I understand the restriction in role, it only applies to preaching, teaching men (doctrine), or Church governance.

All other leadership roles would be open to her.

n 1Tim chapters 2 and 3, Titus Chapter1, and 1Cor 14:34; Paul teaches that women should be excluded from preaching teaching and governing roles in the church.

Since these are the only three occurrences of this teaching; it seems legitimate to question whether Paul was addressing a local problem which was common to Crete, Corinth, and Ephesus; or if he were teaching a general principle.

I do not see Scriptural or historical evidence that Paul was addressing a local issue.


I believe in the Scriptural premise that God prefers male leadership in the pastorate, the pulpit, and the church governing board.

It is evident that this does NOT mean that God can't use a woman in these roles; because He in fact does.

It is evident that there are women in the pastorate whose church members show clear evidence of salvation and Spiritual growth under her leadership.

This, IMO, does NOT negate the principle; however, if God is not pleased with them acting in their roles; it is His responsibility, not mine, to call it to their attention----and He is certainly able to do so.

I am open to three mitigating possibilities; but as yet I do not see conclusive evidence that any of them apply:


1) Since these are the only three occurrences of this teaching; it seems legitimate to question whether Paul was addressing a local problem which was common to Crete, Corinth, and Ephesus; or if he were teaching a general principle.

2) Paul is dealing with an issue of limited cultural relevance.

3) The assembly paul is referring to is the synagogue.

 

[KennethC]

n 1Tim chapters 2 and 3, Titus Chapter1, and 1Cor 14:34; Paul teaches that women should be excluded from preaching teaching and governing roles in the church.

Since these are the only three occurrences of this teaching; it seems legitimate to question whether Paul was addressing a local problem which was common to Crete, Corinth, and Ephesus; or if he were teaching a general principle.

I do not see Scriptural or historical evidence that Paul was addressing a local issue.


I believe in the Scriptural premise that God prefers male leadership in the pastorate, the pulpit, and the church governing board.

It is evident that this does NOT mean that God can't use a woman in these roles; because He in fact does.

It is evident that there are women in the pastorate whose church members show clear evidence of salvation and Spiritual growth under her leadership.

This, IMO, does NOT negate the principle; however, if God is not pleased with them acting in their roles; it is His responsibility, not mine, to call it to their attention----and He is certainly able to do so.

You do know the original meaning for a Deacon is a person who is ordained to be a minister.

It was changed from that over time to what we see now in holding other roles in the church, but the original meaning and its usage for Phoebe in the bible was the original ordained minister role.

Those passages in 1 Timothy and 1 Corinthians have nothing to do with the ministering role, it has to deal with the congregation itself and not for anybody to be unruly and speak out during service to interrupt it. Titus 1 has nothing to do with women being a minister at all.

God is not going to make a command and then go against it, as the bible clearly says He can not deny Himself!

 

[oldhermit]

You do know the original meaning for a Deacon is a person who is ordained to be a minister.

It was changed from that over time to what we see now in holding other roles in the church, but the original meaning and its usage for Phoebe in the bible was the original ordained minister role.

Those passages in 1 Timothy and 1 Corinthians have nothing to do with the ministering role, it has to deal with the congregation itself and not for anybody to be unruly and speak out during service to interrupt it. Titus 1 has nothing to do with women being a minister at all.

God is not going to make a command and then go against it, as the bible clearly says He can not deny Himself!

And I thought you said you knew the Greek.

 

[KennethC]

And I thought you said you knew the Greek.

I do know the Greek;

diakonos: a servant, minister

A minister is a servant of God, just like any other member of the Church is a servant as well.
But the original usage of the Greek diakonos was for an ordained minister role, as was the case with Phoebe who was a deacon (minister) of her church.

It was not tell later writings that down played her role to just servant to hide her position, just like they did with Junia to hide her identity.

 

[oldhermit]

I do know the Greek;

diakonos: a servant, minister

A minister is a servant of God, just like any other member of the Church is a servant as well.
But the original usage of the Greek diakonos was for an ordained minister role, as was the case with Phoebe who was a deacon (minister) of her church.

It was not tell later writings that down played her role to just servant to hide her position, just like they did with Junia to hide her identity.

That is pure nonsense. If you do not know the Greek any better than that you need to stop playing with it.

 

[Gr8grace]

To help clarify so i don't appear to demean women as a gender....I think its great for men and women both to have goals and fulfill them...what I was trying to point out is the so called women's right movement has progressed to where it shouldn't be today....and gives little credit to Gods order in life....God has an order and it shouldn't be disrupted....Apologies for my long post although I hoped it may provide what I see in the world today.....Being a keeper of the home is one of the most demanding, humble and noble of dutiful occupations and women should be commended for it.....Many men do things as a sense of duty and obedience unto the Lord...and when a woman does the same it is very admirable...No wait...actually Beautiful

I understand completely where you are coming from. IMO, you have stated it quite nicely and eloquently.

Your longer post described my little sister to a tee. She married a very wealthy farmer, and manipulates him to death for what she wants. I talked to her once about it about 6 years ago. She hasn't talked to me since.

He doesn't even really like the money, he just likes to farm and is good at it. My sister on the other hand........

 

[KennethC]

That is pure nonsense. If you do not know the Greek any better than that you need to stop playing with it.

That is not nonsense as it comes directly from the Greek concordances for the definition of diakonos.

If you don't like this true definition that comes from the earliest manuscripts of the Greek studies of the scriptures then I don't know what else to say to you.

For this is probably the adaptive definition you are going by, which is the changed form that was done later:

Definition: a waiter, servant; then of any one who performs any service, an administrator.
a deacon, one who, by virtue of the office assigned him by the church, cares for the poor and has charge of and distributes the money collected for their use

Once again though this comes back to early church history study that you have said in the past that you don't care what it says.
The earliest Greek manuscripts have Phoebe called a deacon (minister) of the church in Cenchrea.

It was not tell later translations that they changed it to just servant and added on the rest of the meaning I gave above, on caring for the sick, poor, waiter, and other roles in the church. But the true original definition was not intended for anything other than a minister role.

 

[oldhermit]

Definition: a waiter, servant; then of any one who performs any service, an administrator.
a deacon, one who, by virtue of the office assigned him by the church, cares for the poor and has charge of and distributes the money collected for their use

This is the proper definition of διάκονος. But, what you are doing is trying to force only one of these definitions onto the word as it is used in scripture. This in being nothing less than dishonest. There were women in the NT who were referred to as διάκονος but this term can identify any function of service that they may have rendered. To use this term to suggest that women served a preachers or in an ordained office is entirely unwarranted and without NT support. There is no text anywhere in scripture where the terms preacher, shepherd, or overseer is ever applied to a woman's function within the Church. Anyone who served to perform any service no matter how lowly was called a διάκονος - a servant. When scripture speaks of διάκονος as an officially appointed office within the Church there qualifications that are connected with office that can not be met by women. These were reserved for men and and confined to men but, I suspect you already know this and choose to simply ignore it.

Once again though this comes back to early church history study that you have said in the past that you don't care what it says.
The earliest Greek manuscripts have Phoebe called a deacon (minister) of the church in Cenchrea.

It was not tell later translations that they changed it to just servant and added on the rest of the meaning I gave above, on caring for the sick, poor, waiter, and other roles in the church. But the true original definition was not intended for anything other than a minister role.

I did not say I did not KNOW Church history. What I said was that I have no regard for it as a standard for determining truth.