|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/16/2008 12:45:04 PM
|
|
|
GroupW
Posts: 1687
Joined: 11/16/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JesKlu
It does not seem you adhere to a grammatico-historical method of interpreting scripture. The grammatico-historical method basically says "Scripture interprets Scripture" and believes in Biblical inerrancy. You use the historical-critical method which basically says, "that was then, this is now."
Hi Jessica,
It seems like we're still getting our definitions crossed up. I definitely and most strenuously object to a "that was then, this is now" approach to scripture. We agree on this point in the strongest manner possible.
I interpret the scripture not as a "that was then, this is now" but rather as a "that was then, and this is then as well." We don't disagree on the method of interpretation as much as we disagree about what the "then" was.
Here's how I define "grammatico-historical": Using the literary genre, the historical context of the original authorship, and the historical meaning of the original greek/hebrew to arrive at the meaning and content that the original author would have intended his original audience to understand by what he wrote.
A few principles to follow in using this method:
1) The meaning of a word or phrase would be it's common meaning during the historical period in which it was first put on paper by the original author.
2) The author's typical usage of the word and the common usage in that day and age should determine how we interpret that word today. In other words, we have to put ourselves in the original writer and readers' shoes as best we can.
3) The meaning we ascribe to a text should fit the historical and cultural context of the original writer/readers. To do this, some historical research is absolutely critical. For example, it's impossible to understand the significance of the Last Supper without understanding the Passover. The more we understand about the Passover, the more we understand the Last Supper so bringing in current archaeological and historical research can prove immensely valuable. A different example, certain passages in the Gospel of John & the later epistles are much, much clearer if we have a basic understanding of early Gnostic trends.
4) The bible does not contradict itself.
5) There is no allegorical/subjectively determined meaning that should be ascribed to a text, unless the text itself is clearly an allegory. There is only one meaning to a text, and that is the meaning that the original writer intended everyone to understand.
This is what I believe and follow, and it was what the 1978 Chicago Statement affirms and what most evangelical churches and the LCMS affirm. It is also called the "historical-grammatical" or the "grammatical-critical".
Here's how I would define "historical-critical":
1) Historical-critical methods get the first part right -
Benjamin Jowett, ''Scripture has one meaning—the meaning which it had in the minds of the Prophet or Evangelist who first uttered or wrote, to the hearers or readers who first received it." Historical-critical methods seek to define the historical context of the production of a text and determine the author's intended meaning from that context. This "historical" part is fine.
2) The second part is the "critical" and the wheels fall of the wagon here. Generally, the bible is assumed to have no "a priori" authority . It tends to get put on the same level as any other historical document and analyzes it accordingly. Divine inspiration & inerrancy or even the looser "infallibility" standard is generally not accepted. A few of the "critical" methods that are employed here are:
a) source criticism - what are the original sources for the documents we have
b) redaction criticism - attempting to reconstruct a pattern of ongoing edits to the text in order to determine how scripture has been used and reinterpreted through time.
c) form criticism - identifying specific forms of largely oral traditions that have been incorporated into the written documents that can be analyzed for meaning.
Clearly, what I'm advocating here is indeed a "historical" method but most adamantly NOT a "historical-critical" method. I indeed adhere to a grammatic-historical hermeneutic.
We don't differ in terms of methodology. I think the nature of the disagreement is more what we think the original context for these writings were and how that may have influenced the original writers' intent.
If you go back and search my various posts, I have always tried to argue from the text itself and from my understanding of the historical context. I really don't attempt a "this is now, that was then" method and indeed do not have very much respect for that type of approach. I think it's lazy, incorrect, inappropriate, and worst of all it's taking an unnecessary libert with scripture to "prove" a point that can arguably be made in a much more exegetically sound manner.
I might not be writing this very clearly, so if not I'll appeal to Benelchi for a better summary.
Have a great weekend. Won't be available to post here until next week as I'm taking the church kids snow camping up in the mountains & teaching them how to build & sleep in an emergency snow cave for winter survival techniques. Sounds fun, eh? Sleeping on a slab of frozen water for a couple of nights. Just what everyone wants to do.
BT
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/16/2008 1:02:08 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 1794
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
benelchi,
I replied to a poster. You chose to attack that post with your false ideas. You honestly have no clue what I am talking about. That's ok. My post was not for you.
Until you responded to my post I had not read anything you or the others had to say.
You are so involved with trying to debate/agrue/whatever with notmycity and a few others that you fail to realize "someone else" may be willing to read and respond to a posters question from another point of view.
(you have no clue what I believe. my posting of scripture and telling a poster they did not need to have all this education in order to know what God want's them to know should not have in any way offended you. The fact that it did only tells me that you may need to take a breath before you respond to people you don't know)
First, you posted in a public forum. If you only wanted a response from one person, you should have used a PM and not posted in a Public Forum.
Second, your original post went far beyond simply telling someone that they "did not need to have all this education", you actually said "Remember it was the "educated" folks in Jesus day who twisted God's word to make it mean what ever they wanted it to mean." The implication in your post was that those who are "educated" should be ignored. My point was simply that being "educated" is not an indication of someones spiritual condition; many of these "educated" people are part of the body of Christ and are truly seeking to honor God with their lives. Because they are part of the body of Christ, we should allow them to share the gifts God has given them with us rather than simply ignoring them simply because they are "educated."
Third, making unsubstantiated claims that I presented "false ideas", taking offense that I responded to a post you made in a public forum, or telling me that I should take a break are things not helpful to any discussion; please lay off the personal attacks.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/16/2008 1:13:36 PM
|
|
|
Fritzpw_Admin
Posts: 7551
Joined: 2/28/2005
From: New Jersey
Status: offline
|
ADMIN'S NOTE :: ATTENTION PLEASE
Ok, people. Back to the topic please.
If you wanna duke it out take it to PMs.
If you feel someone has violated the TOS please use the report link at the bottom right of their post.
Further off-topic comments will result in our taking action up to and including a ban from the site.
Please do not reply to this message within the Community.
Please email Community@salemwebnetwork.com with questions, comments, or concerns.
Please do not send me PMs regarding this message.
Messages which disregard the words in red will be removed without warning and the poster may also be banned.
_____________________________
Fritz
Senior Manager of Social Media
fritz@salemwebnetwork.com
Want to see my latest online project? Check out http://christianfriend.com
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/19/2008 10:14:16 AM
|
|
|
P31W
Posts: 1918
Joined: 6/13/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Second, your original post went far beyond simply telling someone that they "did not need to have all this education", you actually said "Remember it was the "educated" folks in Jesus day who twisted God's word to make it mean what ever they wanted it to mean." The implication in your post was that those who are "educated" should be ignored.
The implication is that simply being educated does not make one wise in the things of God. True Wisdom and Understanding come from God alone....no text book and no teacher/preacher can give it to you. (example: Jesus Seminar scholars - liberal theologians)
quote:
Third, making unsubstantiated claims that I presented "false ideas",
The first "false idea" you posted concerning me and the one that sticks out the most in my mind is that I put my trust in the people who interpeted scripture.
I don't put my trust in those who interpeted the scripture in Jesus day, the men who wrote the origionals or the people who write books about the bible today. I don't put my trust in Paul and his ability or Dr. Luke and his.
I put my trust in God and in his ability to do for us what he did in Jesus day and preserve for us His word.
Jesus didn't hold the origionals in his hand. He never questioned those translations:
John 6: 45 As it is written in the Scriptures, 'They will all be taught by God.' Everyone who hears and learns from the Father comes to me.
Notice what Jesus said when tempted by Satan: "it is written"
Mt 4:4
But He answered, "It is written: Man must not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God."
Mt 4:6
and said to Him, "If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down. For it is written: He will give His angels orders concerning you, and, they will support you with their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone. "
Mt 4:7
Jesus told him, "It is also written: You must not tempt the Lord your God."
Mt 4:10
Then Jesus told him, "Go away, Satan! For it is written: You must worship the Lord your God, and you must serve Him only."
Notice what he did do concerning the 'teachings" of the day that were the most popular in the Sermon on the Mt.
Notice "heard"....that is he was comparing what scripture really means with what they were being taught by the religious leaders that scripture means.
Mt 5:21
"You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.'
Mt 5:27 -
"You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.'
Mt 5:33
"Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'Do not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord.'
Mt 5:38
"You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.'
Mt 5:43
"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.'
I don't ever teach people to put their trust in others but in God alone and his ability to preserve for us his word.
You asked why did God give us teachers and preachers? To help us. But he also gives us this in His Word to obey and learn by...... Ac 17:11 -
Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.
(notice they examined the scriptures inorder to test the teacher to see if what he was saying was true.....they also didn't have the origional transcripts)
You also mentioned individualism. Where you get that idea that I believe in such is simply foreign to me. I think again that comes from your pov and experience or debate involvement not mine.
Not back to the topic at hand. The reason I told the poster was to trust in scripture and God is because that is what Jesus showed us. He never questioned the translators or told people to put their trust in those people or their ability.
God's word is pretty plain concerning women's role in the Chruch. To view it otherwise will 'require' that we trust others more than we trust God's word and his ability to preserve it for us today.
And if I cannot trust God's word (today with our translations) to be truthful and trustworthy over a simple matter such as women's roles in the Chruch how in the world can I trust it with the more important matters of life and faith?
(BTW any discerning student of scripture will have noticed that in my posts I have used at least 4 differant translations of scripture. Somehow those various translations with their various translators have been able to convey the same idea concerning women's roles in the church. Many people don't even realize when they read a differant translation but do quickly pick up on where in the bible the passage is from and the meaning of the passage from their own bible study in their own translation(s))
I am not saying that false translations do not and cannot come into play. What I am saying is that today with all our various translations it's false to imply that our most popular translations in the church today are not trustworthy and worthy of our acceptance.
< Message edited by P31W -- 5/19/2008 10:53:04 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/19/2008 11:30:31 AM
|
|
|
JesKlu
Posts: 501
Joined: 4/16/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: P31W
God's word is pretty plain concerning women's role in the Chruch. To view it otherwise will 'require' that we trust others more than we trust God's word and his ability to preserve it for us today.
And if I cannot trust God's word (today with our translations) to be truthful and trustworthy over a simple matter such as women's roles in the Chruch how in the world can I trust it with the more important matters of life and faith?
Hello P31W
You make a good point. God's Word is crystal clear when it comes to women's roles in the Church. why some people like to question I don't know.
Your sister in Christ Jesus,
Jessica
_____________________________
And calling to him a child, he put him in the midst of them and said, "Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/19/2008 12:14:49 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 1794
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
(BTW any discerning student of scripture will have noticed that in my posts I have used at least 4 differant translations of scripture. Somehow those various translations with their various translators have been able to convey the same idea concerning women's roles in the church. Many people don't even realize when they read a differant translation but do quickly pick up on where in the bible the passage is from and the meaning of the passage from their own bible study in their own translation(s))
And many people who are shown all of the verses in the bible that are related to women's role in the church, quickly pickup on the issues and understand why there is a difference of opinion.
quote:
I am not saying that false translations do not and cannot come into play. What I am saying is that today with all our various translations it's false to imply that our most popular translations in the church today are not trustworthy and worthy of our acceptance.
I have never once implied in any way that our most popular translations are not trustworthy. What I have repeatedly said is that we should trust the translators who made those translations when they explain why they translated the passage in the way they did and how they themselves interpret those passages. The liberal scholars involved in movements like the "Jesus Seminar" our not part of the translation teams that produced are most popular bibles, nor will they ever be. Most translation teams require the translators to sign a statement of faith that these liberal scholars would be unwilling to sign.
BTW - there are places of disagreement among the most popular translations, and although I don't believe most are significant issues, they do reflect the differing opinions of the translators. Example: The NIV (which is the primary translation that I use daily) translates 'powerful' and 'mighty' in Exodus chapter 1 as simply numerous. The opinion of the translators was that the Hebrews could not have been considered a powerful and mighty military force. However, the original text clearly describes the Hebrews as 'Powerful' and 'Mighty' and almost every other major translation conveys this quite clearly. While I do place a great deal of trust in the NIV, this is one place where I believe the translators got it really wrong and I trust the translation of the NASB, KJV, NKJV, NRSV for this passage far more than I do the NIV (or the NLT). Simply looking at my NIV or NLT I would get a false impression of the military might of the Hebrew people, and without putting in some hard work and study, or trusting the opinion of someone else who had, it would be impossible to reconcile or understand the differences.
quote:
I don't put my trust in those who interpreted the scripture in Jesus day, the men who wrote the originals or the people who write books about the bible today. I don't put my trust in Paul and his ability or Dr. Luke and his.
This is where I disagree with you most. While I do put my trust first and foremost in God, if Paul were here and could explain what he meant when he wrote the passages in the Bible, I would trust his answer far more than I would trust my own interpretation. When I read a translation, I trust the translator when he tells me what he understood the original passage to be saying when he tried to convey that passage in English. It doesn't mean I always agree with him (or his translation), but it does mean that I put in the hard work and study required before simply dismissing what he has to say; I don't just dismiss his opinion based on my own unstudied feelings.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/19/2008 3:11:41 PM
|
|
|
DenimDiva
Posts: 5678
Status: offline
|
So what are you to do when the best pastor you can find in your area happens to be a woman?
What are we supposed to do about men who aren't stepping up the their leadership roles?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/19/2008 3:44:18 PM
|
|
|
P31W
Posts: 1918
Joined: 6/13/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
So what are you to do when the best pastor you can find in your area happens to be a woman?
Why would you call her the "best"?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/19/2008 3:46:03 PM
|
|
|
JesKlu
Posts: 501
Joined: 4/16/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: P31W
quote:
So what are you to do when the best pastor you can find in your area happens to be a woman?
Why would you call her the "best"?
Agreed.
_____________________________
And calling to him a child, he put him in the midst of them and said, "Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/19/2008 4:01:37 PM
|
|
|
DenimDiva
Posts: 5678
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: P31W
quote:
So what are you to do when the best pastor you can find in your area happens to be a woman?
Why would you call her the "best"?
Because the other pastors are preaching things that don't line up Scripturally or they are really not preaching the Word at all.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/19/2008 4:11:15 PM
|
|
|
notmycity
Posts: 1284
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DenimDiva
quote:
ORIGINAL: P31W
quote:
So what are you to do when the best pastor you can find in your area happens to be a woman?
Why would you call her the "best"?
Because the other pastors are preaching things that don't line up Scripturally or they are really not preaching the Word at all.
And neither is she if she’s overseeing and teaching men in a church. She is in fact raging against Scripture.
1 Tim 2:11-3:2
11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 BUT I SUFFER NOT A WOMAN TO TEACH, NOR TO USURP AUTHORITY OVER THE MAN, BUT TO BE IN SILENCE.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
CHAPTER 3
1 This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.
2 A BISHOP THEN MUST BE BLAMELESS, THE HUSBAND OF ONE WIFE, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
_____________________________
<><Topher
"I am a companion of all them that fear thee, and of them that keep thy precepts." Psalm 119:63
and..
"For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come." Heb 13:14 = "notmycity"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/19/2008 4:16:34 PM
|
|
|
DenimDiva
Posts: 5678
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: notmycity
quote:
ORIGINAL: DenimDiva
quote:
ORIGINAL: P31W
quote:
So what are you to do when the best pastor you can find in your area happens to be a woman?
Why would you call her the "best"?
Because the other pastors are preaching things that don't line up Scripturally or they are really not preaching the Word at all.
And neither is she if she’s overseeing and teaching men in a church. She is in fact raging against Scripture.
What the other pastors are preaching is also raging against Scripture.
What she is preaching is Biblically accurate, but she just happens to be a woman.
Which is better:
A woman preaching the truth?
A man preaching half-truth or downright lies?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/19/2008 4:32:35 PM
|
|
|
notmycity
Posts: 1284
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DenimDiva
....Which is better:
A woman preaching the truth?
A man preaching half-truth or downright lies?
Both are sin.
1 Sam 15:23
23 For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry....
As I have already mentioned here, most MEN are NOT qualified to teach or to lead.
The “half a loaf is better than none” mentality never applies when it comes to God’s Word.
The end does not justify the means if it rages against sound doctrine.
Jesus said:
Luke 6:46-49
46 AND WHY CALL YE ME, LORD, LORD, AND DO NOT THE THINGS WHICH I SAY?
47 Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will shew you to whom he is like:
48 He is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid the foundation on a rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock.
49 BUT HE THAT HEARETH, AND DOETH NOT, IS LIKE A MAN THAT WITHOUT A FOUNDATION BUILT AN HOUSE UPON THE EARTH; AGAINST WHICH THE STREAM DID BEAT VEHEMENTLY, AND IMMEDIATELY IT FELL; AND THE RUIN OF THAT HOUSE WAS GREAT....
_____________________________
<><Topher
"I am a companion of all them that fear thee, and of them that keep thy precepts." Psalm 119:63
and..
"For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come." Heb 13:14 = "notmycity"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/21/2008 5:16:42 PM
|
|
|
DenimDiva
Posts: 5678
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: notmycity
quote:
ORIGINAL: DenimDiva
....Which is better:
A woman preaching the truth?
A man preaching half-truth or downright lies?
Both are sin.
1 Sam 15:23
23 For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry....
As I have already mentioned here, most MEN are NOT qualified to teach or to lead.
The “half a loaf is better than none” mentality never applies when it comes to God’s Word.
The end does not justify the means if it rages against sound doctrine.
Well, at least you're consistant.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/23/2008 2:16:58 AM
|
|
|
Beck34
Posts: 200
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: offline
|
I am sorry that you were offended by someone else's remarks. This thread has gotten out of hand at times, and I feel partially responsible for thehurt you were caused because I am the one who originally began this discussion. I understand that some of you have a strong opinion about this, but please try not to hurt othes with what you have to say. Jesus told us not to judge oneanother. He also told us to love one another, so please, try to be more patient and loving towards those who do not share your views. Thanks!
_____________________________
What do you expect, It's Beck!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/23/2008 2:34:00 AM
|
|
|
DenimDiva
Posts: 5678
Status: offline
|
Hi Beck- I'm not sure who you were talking too. I am not offended.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/23/2008 11:01:20 AM
|
|
|
notmycity
Posts: 1284
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Beck34
....I understand that some of you have a strong opinion about this...
Jesus also said, “O unbelieving and perverted generation, how long shall I be with you? How long shall I put up with you? Bring him here to Me." Matt 17:17 (NAS)
He also had many harsh words for the pharisees and asked them, “Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?” Matt 15:3
Nowadays many lift up culture and practice above God’s Word, especially when in comes to this OP, which makes them every bit as guilty of Matthew 15:3 as the pharisees.
There are those who “have opinions”. There are those too who simply say “It is written”, and who go by God’s Word alone.
_____________________________
<><Topher
"I am a companion of all them that fear thee, and of them that keep thy precepts." Psalm 119:63
and..
"For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come." Heb 13:14 = "notmycity"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/25/2008 1:45:40 AM
|
|
|
Beck34
Posts: 200
Joined: 3/24/2008
Status: offline
|
Yet, it seems as though we are persecuting our own when we sit in judgement of them. It is no differant that the conversation in the new testament about the type of food we are to eat. Only God knows a person's heart, and we shouldn't judge what that is. Jesus talked about that very thing when he talked about the speck and the plank. I just don't want people to turn away from God because of something that was said to them. For years, I ran away from God because of things that were said and done to me in the name of Christianity. Never forget that our number one goal should be to love one another, and in this, we should remember to treat those around us as we would want to be treated.
_____________________________
What do you expect, It's Beck!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/27/2008 11:58:48 AM
|
|
|
notmycity
Posts: 1284
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Beck34
....I just don't want people to turn away from God because of something that was said to them.
.....Never forget that our number one goal should be to love one another, and in this, we should remember to treat those around us as we would want to be treated.
Regarding this OP, again, it all comes down to belief and obedience.
If I love God, I will seek His will through His Word alone, and I will pray for His strength to carry out His will. This includes the OP.
Jesus loved the pharisees, yet He judged their works as being disobedient.
The Christian’s duty is to do likewise in love. Not love as the world teaches, but love as God’s Word teaches.
_____________________________
<><Topher
"I am a companion of all them that fear thee, and of them that keep thy precepts." Psalm 119:63
and..
"For here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come." Heb 13:14 = "notmycity"
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/27/2008 3:17:26 PM
|
|
|
Bro_Shane
Posts: 1370
Joined: 8/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DenimDiva
quote:
ORIGINAL: notmycity
quote:
ORIGINAL: DenimDiva
quote:
ORIGINAL: P31W
quote:
So what are you to do when the best pastor you can find in your area happens to be a woman?
Why would you call her the "best"?
Because the other pastors are preaching things that don't line up Scripturally or they are really not preaching the Word at all.
And neither is she if she’s overseeing and teaching men in a church. She is in fact raging against Scripture.
What the other pastors are preaching is also raging against Scripture.
What she is preaching is Biblically accurate, but she just happens to be a woman.
Which is better:
A woman preaching the truth?
A man preaching half-truth or downright lies?
You make a dreadful mistake here. Both are equally wrong, and neither is better than the other. It is akin to asking which is more preferable - having your right arm and leg removed or having your left arm and leg removed. The difference is of degree, not kind.
There have been many people who have said things that were truthful (or quasi-truthful) while doing things in a manner that was not decent or in order concerning the church. When asking which is better, we should always defer to scripture. The life God calls us to is one of obedience to Him, not one of having to choose the leser of two evils. If you are confronted with such a choice then choose neither and re-evaluate how you arrived at that point. Somewhere along the line, a premise is out of sorts.
_____________________________
I'm baaaack!
Now, where was that Benny Hinn thread?
Numbah One OG Thread Killa
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/27/2008 3:23:51 PM
|
|
|
DenimDiva
Posts: 5678
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bro_Shane If you are confronted with such a choice then choose neither and re-evaluate how you arrived at that point.
Actually I arrived at that point by church shopping, which I'm still doing because the two churches I'm talking about are the reason I started THIS thread.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Men's/Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/27/2008 3:28:55 PM
|
|
|
Bro_Shane
Posts: 1370
Joined: 8/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DenimDiva
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bro_Shane If you are confronted with such a choice then choose neither and re-evaluate how you arrived at that point.
Actually I arrived at that point by church shopping, which I'm still doing because the two churches I'm talking about are the reason I started THIS thread.
Sorry, I don't think I made myself as clear as I should. I was speaking in general here, an not to you specifically as if I was scolding. I'm sure you are a very thoughtful person.
_____________________________
I'm baaaack!
Now, where was that Benny Hinn thread?
Numbah One OG Thread Killa
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Women's role in the Church - One Stop Thread - 5/28/2008 12:57:54 PM
|
|
|
Lycea
Posts: 194
Joined: 6/18/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
I wonder why it is that we feel that if there is a disagreement like this that "obviously" those on the other side of the argument are not with sincere intentions seeking to study the WORD and follow obediently the commands of the Lord.
There are many things that believers around the world are in disagreement about. Do we assume that all of those who do not share our particular viewpoint are sinners and apostate? Or do we continue to seek the Lord where we are and trust that what Jesus said was true that "whoever seeks will find," and that "the Spirit of Truth will guide you into all truth?"
I believe there is room for us to disagree on this issue of women and men and their roles in the church. It is not an issue of salvation. It is not an issue that was even addressed that frequently in the NT. If you don't want to attend a church with a woman in leadership, don't. You are free to follow that interpretation. If, however, you are diligently seeking the Lord and find you have a peace about attending a church with a woman in leadership, then go ahead. You will not loose your salvation by listening to a woman preacher. You will not gain your salvati | | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
