THE FIRST BLAST TO AWAKE WOMEN DEGENERATE

  • 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.

Dude653

Senior Member
Mar 19, 2011
12,689
1,103
113
What are you talking about, ten people? 50% of America is 180 million. Even if 2 million people think that it is only 1% of those that are not vaccinated.

Also you are conflating two things. They are experimenting with putting RFID chips in your hand to use as a credit card. They are also experimenting with using hand prints and facial recognition.

I am not up on all the research but maybe it was Bill Gates who has a patent to be able to use your DNA as an RFID chip by injecting very tiny metallic objects that will bind to DNA. (Again, I do know that they have experimented with this, I don't know if it is Bill Gates who patented it.)
Nanobot technology? I don't think that's happening anytime soon.
That technology is still in its infancy and it still doesn't equate to anyone being forced to take a chip
 

ZNP

Well-known member
Sep 14, 2020
36,778
6,742
113
Nanobot technology? I don't think that's happening anytime soon.
That technology is still in its infancy and it still doesn't equate to anyone being forced to take a chip
Unless you are truly an expert on these things I highly doubt any of us know how far along the research is. My understanding is that the technology we know about is 25 years behind the technology they have.

In order to have something like this for 8 billion people you need a quantum computer and Starlink satellites and 5G. So I'm guessing they are pretty far along.

Personally I don't think that the Mark of the Beast will be an RFID chip, because it does not seem like a big enough change from a credit card or smart phone to cause you to lose your salvation.
 

Dude653

Senior Member
Mar 19, 2011
12,689
1,103
113
Unless you are truly an expert on these things I highly doubt any of us know how far along the research is. My understanding is that the technology we know about is 25 years behind the technology they have.

In order to have something like this for 8 billion people you need a quantum computer and Starlink satellites and 5G. So I'm guessing they are pretty far along.

Personally I don't think that the Mark of the Beast will be an RFID chip, because it does not seem like a big enough change from a credit card or smart phone to cause you to lose your salvation.
Yeah that's kind of my point. There will be no need to put tracking chips in people when you already carry a tracking device in your pocket every day
 

ZNP

Well-known member
Sep 14, 2020
36,778
6,742
113
Yeah that's kind of my point. There will be no need to put tracking chips in people when you already carry a tracking device in your pocket every day
You have to stop thinking like a human and start thinking like Satan, fallen angels and demons. Using this thing to control who buys and sells is simply a means to the end. The Mark of the Beast is exactly what it says it is. This is Satan branding the people who belong to him.
 

Mem

Senior Member
Sep 23, 2014
7,161
2,175
113
I think rather that this thread concerns what often follows flatulence 😁
And apparently it is what floats and has been for ages until now, it's the nature of substance. Although, I'm afraid we've only ourselves to blame.
Considering what might be the cause, I googled "weak mother" and, wouldn't ya know, one of the first articles retrieved after the no. 1 entry "What is a Weak Mother," from Quora, are 2. The Hidden Strength of a Weak Mother and 3. A Weak Mother is a Good Mother- both written by Christian sources. :rolleyes:

So, I thought to check what the bible says of weak women and the only reference my bible app retrieved contained the Strong's Greek 1133. gunaikarion in 2 Timothy 3:6 in the context of:

Evil in the Last Days

1But understand this: In the last days terrible times will come. 2For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3unloving, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, without love of good, 4traitorous, reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, 5having a form of godliness but denying its power. Turn away from such as these!

6They are the kind who worm their way into households and captivate vulnerable women who are weighed down with sins and led astray by various passions, 7who are always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth.

8Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses,a so also these men oppose the truth. They are depraved in mind and disqualified from the faith. 9But they will not advance much further. For just like Jannes and Jambres, their folly will be plain to everyone.

So, now we see why such as this like their women weak! :sneaky:
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,786
2,957
113
This is the kind of OP and attitude that degrades Christianity, and makes people turn away from God. I'm NOT saying that we should follow the culture, at all! In fact, we MUST follow the Bible.

But the OP quotes a stodgy old Presbyterian from Scotland, instead of the Bible. And then when the Bible gets quoted, it is without understanding of the Greek words in 1 Tim 2:11-12:

"A woman must learn quietly with all submissiveness. 12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man. She must remain quiet." NIV

"γυνὴ ἐν ἡσυχίᾳ μανθανέτω ἐν πάσῃ ὑποταγῇ· 12 διδάσκειν δὲ γυναικὶ οὐκ ἐπιτρέπω, οὐδὲ αὐθεντεῖν ἀνδρός, ἀλλ’ εἶναι ἐν ἡσυχίᾳ. " Gk SBL

The key word here is authentein, αὐθεντεῖν. This word is a hapax legomena. That means it is only found once in the entire Bible. It is a word Paul specifically picked to mean something special. He did not use exousia, ἐξουσία, which is the normal word used to mean authority. ( Eg. Romans 13:1-2) It is also a noun, whereas authentein is an infinitive. So, modern translators are saying that one infinitive (verb) should be translated into 2 words, one of them a noun. While Greek can't be translated directly into English, certainly a much better translation exists?

The problem with saying "exercise/usurp authority" is that there are no places in the Bible to compare other uses of the word. Plus, the KJV translation committee used 7 late, corrupted manuscripts. They probably didn't have any contemporaneous uses 400 years ago. Today, many examples of this word exist from that time. In fact, there are over 50 different definitions or usages of this word. The most common is "to domineer." Wow, another infinitive! Wouldn't it be great to take an infinitive in Greek, and translate it to an infinitive in English!?

In fact, this whole verse makes more sense if the words "to domineer" replaces the "exercise authority" it also makes much more sense, in context. Paul was directing Timothy, not to let the women of Ephesus domineer men. These women were priestesses to Artemis, and very wild, and very much in control. They probably hated Christians the same way the silversmiths hated Paul, for introducing this new religion, and losing money on the artifacts of Artemis they made. (Acts 19:23-41) https://www.thebiblejourney.org/bib...orinth16291/the-silversmiths-riot-in-ephesus/

The women in Ephesus were domineering the men. They were either not following Christ, or thinking they could follow Christ without obeying him. No one should domineer over another person! These women were no exception! It was good advice in a pastoral letter written to a young pastor in Ephesus. But it was never meant to be a 100% rule for every woman for all times. That is total eisegesis! Putting into the Bible what you already believe! Rather than taking out (exegesis) of the Bible what is there.

Further, Paul was extremely positive to the women, saying they should learn quietly! That was the same instructions given to rabbinical students. They were also to learn quietly. In other words, Paul was really saying the women should learn in the same manner as the future leaders of Judaism. He wasn't shutting them up, but teaching them the truth about how Christian women should not teach (first) but rather learn before they taught. In fact, between old ways of domineering and the privilege of learning like a future rabbi/leader, Paul was giving women the same freedoms he referred to in other places, such as Gal. 3:28:

"There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

Paul was very consistent and very knowledgable about vocabulary. The original translators were not! They followed King James agenda of women being inferior, and only men in charge. That's known as misogyny today. From Greek meaning, "hating women." I know many men do not hate women, yet they persist with these Middle Ages and Reformation concepts, which are based on tradition and culture.

My Greek professor, Bill Mounce and I had a long discussion about this during 2nd year Greek. He told me to read the section on this verse in his commentary on the Pastoral Epistles. It was 90 pages long. In the end, it all came down to what the word authentein, αὐθεντεῖν meant! He said it was his tradition to believe that women could not be pastors in his upbringing. Tradition! He agreed with me, that if the word authentein did NOT mean "exercise authority" then it would totally change the meaning of the passage. I can't believe people really base an entire repressive and misogynistic doctrine on ONE word, not found anywhere else in the Bible. There is a wide open door here to dump this wrong definition. But, if you refuse to change your "tradition" about women in pastoral leadership, that is on you, not the actual definition of this important word! Which I admit, we cannot know on this earth. But, we can give grace to people who believe differently.

By the way, I am not taking about ordaining gay people, or marrying them. I'm not talking allowing radical feminists into the pulpit. I am talking about a small number of women, who have heard the call of God to become a pastor. Women who love God, who are conservative and solid in their belief in Christ, and bible believing. God called me to seminary, to teach me obedience to God, and to transform me closer to the image of Christ. I grew so much as a person in seminary, and learned so much, too! God did reveal his purpose, which is why I am working on a PhD in Disability Theology! I do preach in my church, but I have been too sick lately with RA med failures. But called as a pastor? No. But I met many women in seminary who were called. Some were ordained in other denominations from the seminary. But that seminary was top notch, one of the better seminaries in Canada, certainly in western Canada. We had Mennonites, Anglicans, Pentecostals, many Baptist groups, and other traditions. And a lot of women!

Just an idea to stop with the traditions, and open your minds and hearts to the concept that maybe Paul was an encourager of women to minister. After all, he called Phoebe a deacon, the same word as used for the men. It actually means "servant" but it is a position of authority in the church today. Phoebe can be a servant, just like the men. Or she can be in authority, just like the men. You can't take a word and give it different definitions, based on tradition, not the actual translation and definition of the word! Paul also named Priscilla first 2/3 times she and Aquila were mentioned. That means the real teacher is the first one mentioned, which is Prisca. Not sure why anyone would contradict that Paul named her as the leader, teacher and pastor of their church, before Aquila. Paul recognized that we are all one in Christ. Why would that suddenly be wrong, in another passage? It would not be wrong! As per Gal 3:28 above! It is most consistent with Paul's use of teacher/pastor!
 

ZNP

Well-known member
Sep 14, 2020
36,778
6,742
113
dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power,
 

tourist

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2014
42,598
17,062
113
69
Tennessee
You are strong manning me.
I never said anyone who doesn't take the vaccine is doing so because he thinks it's the mark of the beast. What I did say is anyone who thinks it's the mark of the beast is definitely into tin foil hat territory
Besides that, the vaccine is not effective and impairs the immune system. A true vaccine is based on a dead virus, this Covid 'vaccine' is a concoction of chemicals which may or may not react to the virus itself. Also, the vaccine changes your DNA.

Who knows what the long-term health consequences that may have an adverse impact of the health of those that choose to take it? You must have a series of injections, followed by endless boosters. That alone shows that this is not an effective vaccine.

Nothing I want in my body. The stuff is poison.
 

ZNP

Well-known member
Sep 14, 2020
36,778
6,742
113
Besides that, the vaccine is not effective and impairs the immune system. A true vaccine is based on a dead virus, this Covid 'vaccine' is a concoction of chemicals which may or may not react to the virus itself. Also, the vaccine changes your DNA.

Who knows what the long-term health consequences that may have an adverse impact of the health of those that choose to take it? You must have a series of injections, followed by endless boosters. That alone shows that this is not an effective vaccine.

Nothing I want in my body. The stuff is poison.
What I find very interesting is that they have lied about all this.

1. Safe -- that was a lie

2. Effective -- that was a lie

3. Pandemic of the unvaccinated -- that was a lie

4. Came from a bat cave -- that was a lie

5. No evidence it came from the Wuhan bioweapons lab -- that was a lie.

6. Masks will protect you and others -- that was a lie

7. HCQ is bleach -- that is a lie

8. Ivermectin is for horses -- that is a lie

9. Cuomo is the gold standard of how to deal with the disease -- that is a lie

10. It doesn't change your DNA -- that is a lie

People can make a mistake, but these were blatant, in your face, shoved down your throat lies. If you challenged them you were censored, fired, and ostracized. There is nothing "innocent" about this. No one who force fed us these lies should be allowed to now claim it was an innocent mistake. You want to be forgiven, full confession and let's see the fruit of repentance.
 

Shepherd

Active member
May 11, 2022
248
82
28
God chose Deborah, but nowhere are we told to choose a woman as elder, leader, official, Pastor, Deacon, etc. We are to mind our own business as to what or who God chooses and we are to follow what he has commanded us.

"The secret things belong unto Jehovah our God; but the things that are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law." (Deut 29:29, ASV)

We can guess at why God put Deborah in as judge, but we cannot know for he has not told us.
Right. Samson was a "judge" as well but I have seen nowhere saying that he had a position of "authority". Deborah was a "seer"; and as such, she received information directly from God. This is the reason Barak wanted her to go with him in the battle. Barak trusted in God and wanted as much of God's presence in the battle as he could get and he didn't care who got the credit. This is why "Barak" is listed with the "heroes of faith" in Hebrews chapter 11. Biblically, women are not to be in positions of authority over men. And if our government/s followed such principles as well as others, our nation wouldn't be in the mess it is in today.
 

ZNP

Well-known member
Sep 14, 2020
36,778
6,742
113
Right. Samson was a "judge" as well but I have seen nowhere saying that he had a position of "authority". Deborah was a "seer"; and as such, she received information directly from God. This is the reason Barak wanted her to go with him in the battle. Barak trusted in God and wanted as much of God's presence in the battle as he could get and he didn't care who got the credit. This is why "Barak" is listed with the "heroes of faith" in Hebrews chapter 11. Biblically, women are not to be in positions of authority over men. And if our government/s followed such principles as well as others, our nation wouldn't be in the mess it is in today.
Wow such a simple solution. Imagine if Russia, Iran and N. Korea knew that. Oh, wait...
 

Dude653

Senior Member
Mar 19, 2011
12,689
1,103
113
"To promote a woman to bear rule, superiority, dominion, or empire above any realm, nation, or city, is repugnant to nature; contumely to God, a thing most contrarious to his revealed will and approved ordinance; and finally, it is the subversion of good order, of all equity and justice.

In proof of this proposition, I will not be so curious as to gather whatsoever may amplify, set forth, or embellish the same; but I am purposed, even as I have spoken my conscience in most plain and few words, so to stand content with a simple proof of every member, bringing in for my witness God's ordinance in nature, his plain will revealed in his word, and by the minds of such as be most ancient amongst godly writers." page 6, TheFirstBlastOfTheTrumpetAgainstTheMonstrousRegimentOfWomen
https://archive.org/details/TheFirs...tTheMonstrousRegimentOfWomen/page/n5/mode/2up

Those are the words of: "John Knox, (born c. 1514, near Haddington, East Lothian, Scot.—died Nov. 24, 1572, Edinburgh), Scottish clergyman, leader of the Scottish Reformation and founder of Scottish Presbyterianism. Probably trained for the priesthood at the University of St. Andrews, he was ordained in 1540. He joined a group of Protestants who fortified St. Andrews Castle, but they were captured by French Catholics and carried away into slavery in 1547. Released through English intervention in 1549, he spent four years preaching in England, where he influenced developments in the Church of England. With the accession of the Catholic Mary I, he fled to the Continent. He served as pastor at Frankfurt am Main and Geneva until his return to Scotland in 1559. In England, Elizabeth I made common cause with the Scottish Presbyterians, lest the French gain control of Scotland to support its Catholic monarch, Mary, Queen of Scots. Knox survived conflicts with Mary and spent the rest of his life in setting up the Presbyterian church." Encyclopedia Britannica

I watched the ceremony in honor of Queen Elizabeth in St. Giles Cathedral yesterday and it brought to mind it was the church where John Knox was minister. I imagine Knox was rolling over in his tomb about the church, which now ordains woman to the pulpit, marries same-sex couples, and ordains openly professed homosexuals to the pulpit as well. The 41-page booklet by John Knox about women in the rule should be read by every Bible-believing Christian. It is amazing how those in the MAGA movement claim to be strict constructionist about the US Constitution, but feel at liberty to deny and disobey the commands of God in his word as they treat it as changeable by cultures. The arguments against Knox in the 16th century are similar to the religious feminist's arguments of today.

Lest I be misunderstood, I will be voting for Donald Trump or Ron DeSantis for president in 2024 and a straight Republican ticket in the coming midterm election as well, excepting any woman even if endorsed by Donald Trump.

"TheFirstBlastOfTheTrumpetAgainstTheMonstrousRegimentOfWomen" by Knox convinces me that is where we are heading. Watching Steve Bannon's War Room it seems half of his guests are women and it will become worse for sure unless God revives us, his people, and brings us back to his word.
Sounds like you're arguing for it theocracy.
The amendment clause to the Constitution literally says that government cannot pass laws that favor anyone religion. So by not doing so they are honoring the constitution.
If you want a theocracy, move to Saudi Arabia
 
K

kaylagrl

Guest
And if our government/s followed such principles as well as others, our nation wouldn't be in the mess it is in today.
Yeah this country is in the crap it's in because women... smh
 
K

kaylagrl

Guest
Ethan1942 said:Someone mentioned hypocrisy, and the major hypocrisy I see is in the churches of today as they go on and on about abortion, which is not specifically addressed in the Scriptures, but ignore the direct commands of God about the role of women and the relationship with men.



My first post ......Hold up!! Slam on the brakes!!! You're telling me that God in heaven is MORE offended by women in the pulpit than He is about abortion?! Please tell me you didn't just make that utterly ridiculous comparison!


Still haven't gotten an answer to my first question. So I will bump it again and hope the OP gives us an answer.
 

ZNP

Well-known member
Sep 14, 2020
36,778
6,742
113
BTW abortion is directly mentioned in the Bible. Just because the Bible does not use a dehumanizing term like abortion to refer to the sacrifice of your seed (fetus) or son, daughter (baby) doesn't mean that it doesn't refer to this human sacrifice to Moloch and Baal.

Now someone who has an abortion can say that they aren't sacrificing their baby to Moloch or Baal, instead they can't have a baby now because of their career (same thing) or they can't afford a baby right now (same thing) or they want to live a lifestyle of fornication without the responsibility of babies (same thing). If you are sacrificing your baby for a career, money or fornication you are worshipping those things and that is what Moloch and Baal represent.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
60,322
29,573
113
Right. Samson was a "judge" as well but I have seen nowhere saying that he had a position of "authority".
The Hebrew term shofet, translated into English as “judge,” is closer in meaning to “ruler” than the English
meaning. An example of this would be a military leader or deliverer who protects people from threats or
actual defeat. Judges were God-ordained leaders raised to deliver Israel from their enemies.
click

Saying appointed judges have no authority borders on the ridiculous :oops:
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,489
13,797
113
Biblically, women are not to be in positions of authority over men.
The Bible does not teach that at all.

No, 1 Timothy 2:12 does not say that, in case you're about to blast a response.
 
Oct 20, 2022
352
121
43
Well first of all the Bible doesn't say anywhere that a woman can't hold a political office.
People just take the opinion of one guy, the apostle Paul who never met Jesus and use it to support their misogynistic views
Paul praised the women in service in the church as what we'd today call pastors. So Paul had no problem with women in offices in the church.

The OP is foolish. And quite frankly not to be taken seriously imo.

God insured women would carry forth the human race as life givers.
The OP has no respect for women while owing his life to one.