Rumple

The plan would be great except that who is going to cut their own retirement to that extent on purpose? Perhaps a very strong lobby by enough people against Congress would get them to compromise by reducing their benefits somewhat, but more than that is needed to put the system in the black. Something else that could be done in conjunction with, at least, a reduction in Congressional benefits, would be to withhold FICA earnings from earnings from all work which is income taxable instead of having an upper limit. This, of course, would hurt higher paid workers, but it would produce a very substantial increase in revenues going into the Social Security Trust Funds without making any other significant changes to the benefits payable to beneficiaries.

And which 'believer' would be otherwise? None of us that I know among believers are perfect yet, but this is one similarity between us and unbelievers. We frequently admit that we as believers still see through a glass darkly, but how many unbelievers would admit they also have limited knowledge? Their knowledge is limited to the abilities of their own flesh, while ours is enhanced by the unlimited ability of our God. Oh, of course, an unbeliever would deny that we have such an enhanced ability because they cannot perceive it in us. Only a believer has been given 'eyes to see' even a portion of the things of God. You believe that you have the entire world before you to conquer with man's abilties while we believe that the entire world of your belief is extremely limited, because it lacks the ability to even conceive of what else there might be.

Even the resurrection that occurs in His people, the renewing that brings them to Life from the death in sin where they have been until meeting Jesus?

Are you unloving Greg? That is not for me to say. That is between you and God and, of course, anyone you deal with. As to her identification with the Nazis, NO, we should not ignor it it, but neither should we condemn her on that basis alone. The Pharisees were quick to condemn each and every publican because of their profession, but Jesus called one of them to follow Him and he (Matthew) apparently turned out OK. As to defending the Truth...does it need to be defended? It simply is... and nothing anyone can say or do will change that. If we are to ever win souls it is likely to be souls of people who are very much immersed in the things of the world...even in Nazism. Remember Corrie Ten Boom's 'The Hiding Place'? She was perfectly willing to be a 'good Christian' and pray for the poor tortured and suffering interns of the concentration camp. But...she was shocked when she discovered that her sister was referring to the cruel German guards when she spoke in sorrow about those poor souls.

Hello again nebula! Doing that never occurred to me. One strike against me. She did do that and now less likely it is still possible that the name was taken on the basis of honor the cross of Christ rather than in some favorable recognition of the Third Reich. Lacking more evidence I would still be inclined to give her the benefit of a doubt. It certainly would be better from our standpoint if she would answer for herself. Perhaps from her standpoint for valid reasons unknown to us this is not the case. Indeed, suspicions of her intentions are not unreasonable, and she may be guilty as charged, but a conviction is hardly in order. As to her user name, I understand why a person chooses to have one for their own security. Sometimes the names are chosen randomly and sometimes the names chosen can result in unexpected offenses. Some people like myself are very naive about things which are common knowledge to most others. I recognize my own limitations here and again would give her the benefit of a doubt absent more definite evidence. I know at this point that she looks guilty, but applying the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' doesn't cost us much here except maybe a little time and possibly pride. I wouldn't call it unloving , but neither would I call it loving and probably no one else would. My point is not that she is right about anthing, but rather that we should not have judged, much less misjudged, based on the information available. For example if a teacher is falsely, but publicly, accused of molesting a child, the teacher's reputation is marred even if later exonerated. It would cost us nothing but time to wait until all of the evidence is in before announcing the verdict. The humblest of apologies does little good after the damage is done. Is it reasonable us to convict a person of anything simply because he/she does not accept Jesus? As Jesus did not come to condemn the world, neither should we. Someone who is not saved is already condemned without us adding our two cents worth.

"To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:" Ecc 3:1 "...a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;" Ecc 3:7 "And when he was accused of the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing. Then said Pilate unto him, Hearest thou not how many things they witness against thee? And he answered him to never a word; insomuch that the governor marvelled greatly." Matt 27:12-14

This an extremely unfair attack with no factual basis. Hey - I have to disagree with your assessment of Greg's comment. He didn't say Ehrenkreuz was an evil Nazi, but that he is identifying himself with the Nazis by taking on the name of one of their highest honors. The last sentence had to do with known Nazi practices. I personally fail to understand why someone would take on such an association to oneself. Now, this would make for an interesting theological debate - how did Jesus treat those who spoke evil of Him? If you read the things He said to and about the Pharisees, Sadducees, scribes and teachers of the Law who opposed Him, He wasn't always very nice. Why did Jesus associate Himself with prostitutes and publican who in the eyes of others were obvious sinners? Erhenkreuz agreed that his name indicated the name of a medal given the time of the Nazi regime. He did not say that he took on the name, himself, for that reason. It may simply be the name that his parents gave him at birth. Also, my German is good enough to know that the word 'Ehren' means 'honor' or 'respect' and may be used as either a verb or a noun. The other part of the name, 'Kreuz' means 'cross' or 'crucifix'. It is the same German word that Martin Luther uses regularly in his translation of the Bible to desinate the 'cross' on which Jesus was cruicified. The origin of Ehrenkreuz's name may well be a Christian one intending to give honor to Christ, Himself. Of course, I do not know that this is the case. But...neither does anyone else here except for Ehrenkreuz, himself. Does he stand condemned without us even knowing the facts? Did jesus stand condemned before Pilate for something of which He was not guilty? Do we on this forum want to counted with the Pharisees and Pilate as condemning an innocent man?

Ehrenkreuz, We, believers, live by faith, not by absolute knowledge. Neither do we live by man's ways, but by God's Way, or, at least, that is what we should be both trying and desiring to do. Unfortunately, many of us stumble and you and others will be quick to point out these stumbles. You are obviously a smart and educated fellow. But...we do not make it with God because of either our intelligence or our education. The Bible uses the words "whosoever will" to describe the ones that can receive what God has for them. This is good for rich man, poor man, beggar man or thief, doctor, lawyer or Indian chief. It is also good for those who have memorized the Bible and for those who cannot even read their own language. No one is barred from entrance. You argue and debate for points on this forum and other places, but if we are correct, those points will have no bearing on the final result. The final result will depend upon God judgment alone. [Even if we were wrong, we would still lead a more satisfying life than most do. But...we are not wrong.] You can pick on people who know less about the physical Bible and its origins as indicated by the studies and logic of man than you. This doesn't change the fact that you cannot disprove the validity of the promise we have received. And... I know the contrary thing that you could say here: Neither can we prove the validity of the promise we have received. The proof which we do have can be shared by those that have it, but only those whose hearts are open and sincere are able to understand it and believe it. In other words I can share with you my personal testimony of how God drew me in and showed me His Way and what He has done for me, but that will not make you know what it really is. You can only know that when and if you have received the same thing in your heart. Make God richly bless your search for Truth if it is a genuine search for Truth rather than an attempt to show by man's logic and science that someone else is in error.

Please accept my apologies. I forgot where I was when I read your questions and I did not bother to look at your information. Forgive me for being so harsh in my statement, for I thought I was discussing with another believer. I know its up to you, but I don't think you have anything to apologize for OneLight! I'm not apologizing for what I said, but for how I said it. I should of taken the time to explain why I feel this way, so that the unbeliever would feel the love of Jesus through my words. It sounded like something one would say to a child ... "Because I said so!" Yes, there is charity!

Please accept my apologies. I forgot where I was when I read your questions and I did not bother to look at your information. Forgive me for being so harsh in my statement, for I thought I was discussing with another believer. I know its up to you, but I don't think you have anything to apologize for OneLight! And where is charity? "Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things." I Cor 13:4-7

its a Medal of Honor in Germany, if I remember correctly. You do remember correctly. Handed out during the Nazi era of Third Reich to citizens who displayed great courage/contributed strongly to the war effort. Oh yes, the Iron Cross! So you are identifying yourself with one of the highest honors that the Nazis awarded. The Nazis, who exterminated the Jews, persecuted Christians, subscribed to the pagan philosophies of the Aryian cultures; what's up with that? This an extremely unfair attack with no factual basis. The man may disagree with the basics of Christianity, but he still deserves to be treated as Jesus would treat him.

its a Medal of Honor in Germany, if I remember correctly. Ehren is honor Kreuz is cross

believe that God knows all things past present and future, but He only shares any of this knowledge at His discretion for His own purposes. God, however, does not not determine what actions a person will take. He knows which of us will endure to the end in Jesus, but He does not determine whether we are saved or not. We do based on our actions and/or decisions. We have been given the choice to serve God or not. The fact that He knows what all of our choices are in advance does not change the fact that they are our choices. So why does He bother to give us the choices, if he knows the results anyway? Very simply He wants men to serve Him and love Him and do all that we can to please, BECAUSE we choose to do so, not because we had no other choice. Our choices are to be made in the midst of many difficulties and a certain doubt as to our reward, if any. He wants those to be with Him through eternity who given such difficulties and doubts remained steadfast in their efforts to please Him. If we knew everything from the beginning perfectly which of us would choose not to serve Him? Therefore He made it necessary for us to live by faith in things unseen with the natural eye, including Him. Even the repetition is part of His plan: "The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us. " Ecc 1:9-10 Individuals rarely learn by other people's experiences and often not even their own. All of this and more is part of God's plan.

Ruling the congregation? I just don't understand this. Where is the authority to decide this issue? Who is to say whether you have 1 pastor or 5? Is this why there are over 25,000 protestant denominations? Welcome to Worthy! I agree, there should not be one pastor but 2-5 at least, per congregation. One pastor leading everyone gives an open door to several consuming sins for him to battle with, it's for his own good AND the congregation. What 'none' says here may be generally true, but it does not allow for the possibility that God's will may be involved in whether there should be only one pastor or several for a particular assembly. Prayer on such an issue is always appropriate and where there is no specific commandment as to our course of action prayer is even more necessary.

Shalom Rumple, No. Jesus did not ordain women pastors. Women who want to live like Jesus should follow His commands as well as His example. No one "just happens" to be a pastor Rumple. It is a serious thing. And something that the Scriptures do not support. VickiLynn, Jesus didn't ordain anyone including male pastors. Ordination rituals were an invention of the Catholic church. Amen!

Well dude, I don't know any feminist denominations. There may be some masculinist denominations though, that would be churches that are hard lined patricarchal.: As for me, I'm a charismatic So. Baptist. Some of us ordain women and some of us don't. Most don't. Weak men. LOL I've always thought the really weak men were the most threatened by women who are smart and skilled. Strong women don't threaten me. Blaming men for the worlds problems. Hmmmm you mean that all our patriarchal societies with strong male leadership who warred against each other for who knows what reasons aren't responsible for the results of their strong male decisions? Come on. Of course men are primarily responsible for the leadership they exercise. When women exercise leadership they are responsible for the good and bad of it too. But we all know that know matter how many skilled and gifted female leaders there are, there will always be more male leaders than females. that means that males will always be primarily responsible for the ills of the world. Comes with the territory. But really sw, let's knock off the personal attacks and get back to disagreeing about Bibilical interpretations. Calling me names just doesn't impress me nor does it make me question my years of research on the subject at hand. :: "And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?" I Cor 8:11

1 Timothy 3 isn't even talking about shepherds (pastors). Paul used different Greek words there. And in Ephesians 4 there are no limitations of the gifts placed on women. Show my your resume concerning Greek language studies and explain why your conclusions differ from every credible theologian in church history on this. Oh of course, they are all sexists. sw sw, would a doctorate in Greek language studies make a difference to you? WHo decides which theologian are are credible and which are not?

actually, if that were true, there would be more "homosexuals" trying to pastor..... there are several (denominations as some would say) that do ordain women and have not even remotely concidered those that are living in sin ( homosexuals for instance ) The Assemblies is one that has had women working in the ministry for a very long time, and yet, the women have to stand to the heavy standard of living an upright and blameless life, as their male counterparts do.... a person livng in sin is not living an upright nor a blameless life..... a person can be innocent and not be blameless.... there is a differance.... blameless means there is no way anyone can point fingers... a person that is innocent can do things to attract undue, unwarrented attention and bad publicity.... ( such as going to a bar every day after work and not drinking anything but soda, the appearance is not blameless.... ) anyways, the 2 year thing is not correct.... mike Actually, there are many denominations that have ordained women in pastoral and associated positions for at least a hundred years. I saw a list once. Long list. It included Quakers, Assembly of God, Church of God, Foursquare, Methodist and several others I don't recollect at the moment. In the 1800's when women fought for the right to vote and other privileges, along with the fight for the release of slaves, it did open more doors for women in the near future. White males were the prejudicial preferreds of most of the world for many eons. We have the history of communism and the KKK's to remind us of that. You'd think by now that we would realize it is best if everyone earn their privileges and recognition by proving their worthiness instead of having select groups handed privileges they don't deserve. At least you are now being honest. You are no longer trying to twist God's word on the subject to fit your personal agenda. You are now being honest enough to argue from the unbelieving world's perspective. And your prejudice against males is also coming through loud and clear. Women rulers in the world have not shown themselves to be any less oppressive than men so your reasoning there (nice KKK and communism examples) is exceedingly flawed. sw MOI? prejudiced against my own gender...... ahahahahahaha unbeLIEVable. hehehehehe Let's just say that I'm am prejudiced against all negative prejudicial positions, no matter who they harm and who they show preferential treatment for precluding Biblical sinful behavior. hehehehe that was a good one. talk about reaching. And my personal "agenda" is God's Truths that set the captives free. Let's get down to the nitty gritty dude. Which of the feminine denominations are you with? And yes, your statement reflected bias against males whether you are one or not. But then again many weak men in feminist denominations have decided to allow women to take over their church just like you. That is essentially how it happened. And based on your prior post, blaming men for the world's problems, apparently you have bought into their feminine world view. Step up to the plate and be a man and take your church back. sw feminist denominations??? which ones have not allowed women to pastor now? even the Baptist have, there are not many that have, but they have.... if you look at all the denominations, you will find that they all pick and choose which parts of the Bible to accept and which parts to reject..... there is not a single denomination that has not rejected parts of the Word of God..... one may say you can not have musical instruments in the service of God, another might say that speaking in tongues is no longer for today, yet another may say that only certain people can be pastors, and others say that anyone called can, another may put massive restrictions on people to keep them bound by rules rules and more rules..... another might say a person has to confess each and every sin before a man before they are forgiven, and they may have to do it on a regular basis... another says that communion is only for the "paperwork/registered" members and not open for the entire body of Christ.... another may even say that you are not saved unless you are baptised, another may not allow a person to join their fellowship unless they have been baptised into their denomination (even though they have already professed their faith and accepted Christ and have already been baptised....) there are none that are perfect those that accept women ministering will not be moved, and those that do not accept it will not be moved... not by man anyways.... there are women that i will listen to speak, and there are some that i will not..... there are men that i will listen to speak, and there are some that i will not..... my wife and me have modeled our work after another couple, for we were impressed by the way they allowed the Lord to work through them.... especially at alter calls.... she would take one side, and he would take the other side of the alter area.... no one was allowed to minister unless they were called upon and the women would be on one side, and the men on the other.... all the ministers/elders would be called to the alter area, but again, unless directed by either him or his wife, no one was to do anything.... you may think this is a bit rigged but, there were more workings happening then i have seen in other ways.... why???? well, you have some that will not be spiritually ready and will actually dampen the Spirits work..... the husband would move along the men and speak with each one, find what they were seeking, and call a peticular male ( or two ) to minister to that peticular man..... his wife would be doing the same with the ladies.... there might be a time also, when the husband would call upon his wife to come and assist him with a peticular situation, and also in the reverse..... she would call upon him to assist her with a situation.... it was not a freeforall..... there have been times, i would not go to the alter to minister, but rather would stand back, and plead for those that were going to the alter, some times i would do nothing more then to walk and stand behind the person that the pastor was ministering to...... there were times that the pastor would send the alterworkers (and other ministers and elders ) to step back from the person(s) he was working with, for one reason or other.... am I for women ministers/pastors? or am I against them? well, it actually depends, if the governing authority says NO.... then i say they should not push the issue, but should be submissive to the governing authority..... if the governing authority says YES, then i say allow them to be submissive to the governing authority... as Christ said...... IF THEY ARE NOT AGAINST US, THEN THEY ARE FOR US.... as he spoke to His disciples when they rebuked others for casting out demons and healing in the Name if Christ and they were not walking with them, (or following along as they were ) are these women against Christ???? are these women preaching/teaching Christ???? if they are, they are not against Christ.... if an assistant pastor, is doing what he feels God wants, as he believes God is leading, but it goes against the head pastor, he should be submissive to the head pastor, or he will cause a division among the church and actually cause the chuch to split or even fall...... who is for Christ? who is not? even those TV evangelist, the ones tha tpeople jump on for not going to all the sick wards and healing everyone.... first off, it is not them that heal, and second, how do we know where God is leading them.... next why are we scoffing.... and who is placed in authroity over them???? who is responsible for all our leaders???? for all our pastors????? GOD is...... those that say they only fall under the AUTHORITY of GOD, are in for a great fall, they are actually in rebellion against what the Lord has set before them..... mike This is bogus. Many denominations still make every effort to follow God's Word and do not ordain women. No denomination or non-denomination is inerrant because sin taints us but those who have gone down the dark road of women's ordination have exhibited a complete disdain for God's word as they twist and torture it to justify their feminist agenda. All you have to do is follow this thread and see how they abuse the Bible to justify themselves. Its a scandal. sw Yes, the sharp two edged sword cuts both ways doesn't it?

This is really a big problem in this thread. Is the issue whether or not a woman has a vibrant ministry that appears to be fruitful or is it following God's qualifications laid out in the Bible for offices in the church? Clearly positions of authority including that of pastor are limited to males and that has been demonstrated throughout the thread. The issue is not whether or not they are good or poor pastors or whether a woman is an otherwise good pastor. This is not an exercise in pragmatism or what works. sw sw, if positions of authority were as clearly demonstrated as you say throughout this thread to everyone involved in this thread, it likely would have ended a while back. It continues probably because difference of opinion or doubt still exist here. No it continues because many love the world more than the Word. sw Yes, and love of the world causes differences of opinion.

Shalom Rumple, No. Jesus did not ordain women pastors. Women who want to live like Jesus should follow His commands as well as His example. No one "just happens" to be a pastor Rumple. It is a serious thing. And something that the Scriptures do not support. You are absolutely correct Vickilynn! No one just happens to be a pastor. My error for the way I expressed that.

Shalom Rumple, I'm sorry, but saying that women tended sheep (the animals) is not Biblical support for the theory that women should be pastors of people. You are reading something into the Scriptures that is simply not there for doctrine. It's a nice thought, but it's not correct exegesis. Exegesis? This word has been shown to me before. No, I do not or my method is not. I simply read the Bible and talk to God. Once in a while I am led to study a certain matter. Hopefully, most of the leading is by the Holy Ghost showing me the Way to more Truth. Shalom Rumple, Exegesis means to study the Bible correctly. Every person should study the Bible to know the truth and not read it to fit their own ideas. By saying that women should be ordained pastors because women tended sheep is not Biblical truth. IOW, if you say that, you are not interpreting the Scriptures correctly (exegesis) since the Bible does not say that. I do not say that women should be ordained or not ordained, Vickilynn. I am searching in this. I have only known a couple of women pastors. My knowledge of those was only very slight making it impossible to form any reasonable opinions about them and their respective ministries. On the other hand I have known many male pastors over the years and have sat under 8 different ones including my first a RC (Roman Catholic) priest. Two of the eight were really so out of line with God's will that He led me to leave their congregations because of them. I do say that God is the one who calls people to be what He has for them. Does He call women to be in any of the five-fold ministry as listed in Eph 4:11? I believe so, but my belief is not set in concrete. Am I misinterpreting the scriptures in any way? Without a doubt, but in this I am certainly not alone. I do not know a single person who is perfectly in God's will all of the time. And...like all of the rest I believe that I am right about certain things that I do or believe even though I know that some of them are wrong. Part of the reason I am here and have been in other Internet forums now and in the past to learn. The Holy Ghost leads us to Truth, but very often people are a conduit to such Truth. "O LORD, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps." Jerem 10:23 Shalom Rumple, I appreciate your gracious reply and your humble spirit in your post. Yes, we are all human and capable of misinterpreting the Scriptures. That is why we see so many "debates" in the Body. Each is making a stand on what they believe the Scriptures say, but they can't say the exact opposite with the same verse. Yet, some Christians read the Scriptures and see one thing and others can see the same verse and see something completely different. The thing is, unless it is an area of salvation, it is simply areas where we will walk out what we believe the Scriptures are saying. For me, I strongly believe that women should NOT be pastors, teachers or hold any position where there is authority over men. For others, they see it differently. For me, I will not go to a church where a woman holds a position of authority over men. For others, they have different views. Rumple, we are ALL here to learn! No one has all truth and no one has arrived at perfection, certainly not me. So, I am right there with you, learning and praying and seeking G-d. So, at the end of the day, we each love Jesus and iron sharpens iron. Yes? Amen!

This is really a big problem in this thread. Is the issue whether or not a woman has a vibrant ministry that appears to be fruitful or is it following God's qualifications laid out in the Bible for offices in the church? Clearly positions of authority including that of pastor are limited to males and that has been demonstrated throughout the thread. The issue is not whether or not they are good or poor pastors or whether a woman is an otherwise good pastor. This is not an exercise in pragmatism or what works. sw sw, if positions of authority were as clearly demonstrated as you say throughout this thread to everyone involved in this thread, it likely would have ended a while back. It continues probably because difference of opinion or doubt still exist here.

Then Jesus is talking about men pastors? Is that a stretch? I don't see 'men' in there anywhere. Do you? LOL. It would seem reasonable that since both men and women were animal shepards that when Christ was talking about spiritual sheparding by only men, He would have said "male/men shepards". Shalom, Nope. The "stretch" is saying that ANYONE other than Jesus is the Shepherd here. He is not talking about pastors in this passage, but Himself, the Good Shepherd. See verses 11, 14-15. And we who are desiring to be like Him so that we can see Him as He is, if one of us happens to be a pastor of a flock of Jesus' people would he/she not be attempting to follow His example?

Shalom Rumple, I'm sorry, but saying that women tended sheep (the animals) is not Biblical support for the theory that women should be pastors of people. You are reading something into the Scriptures that is simply not there for doctrine. It's a nice thought, but it's not correct exegesis. Exegesis? This word has been shown to me before. No, I do not or my method is not. I simply read the Bible and talk to God. Once in a while I am led to study a certain matter. Hopefully, most of the leading is by the Holy Ghost showing me the Way to more Truth. Actually it's not exegesis, more like noting word meanings. He was noticing that women were animal shepards then (and today) as well as the men. The connection being that since Christ chose the analogy of sheparding which was done by both men and women, why think of Biblical sheparding as only done by men. Same thing can be done with the word for minister/serve. It was something that both men and women did so why when looking at spiritual serving should it be limited to men. Was that something like your point Rumple? I think it is a valid observation but not a tie breaker. No, not a tie breaker, Oops! Only God will break such a tie to show someone, me or another, His Truth. Even if I am right I cannot convince anyone of God's Truth unless God is in the convincing through me. He gives the increase. No one else! As to word meanings I do get into those some but seldom via the original Bible languages. Though my native language is American English, I have been a student of both Spanish and German read my Bible daily in both. It gives me a different perspective. Even what I obtain from that though is very mush dependent on what He wishes to give me. The following verse led me to not simply study scripture to find all of the answers. Not only good students are saved. "And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh." Ecc 12:12 The following verse used by many to show that we must study to find God's Truth tells me something else. "Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." II Tim 2:15 I see II Tim 2:15 as something to obey. God wants us to study not to learn His Truth, [although some of that may occur in the process], but because He asks us to do it. The following verse is more precise in showing just how and when I learn. "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." John 14:26 I occasionally learn something NEW during my Bible studies, but usually, it is something that I am not specifically seeking at the time. He knows what I need better than I do and His timing is always better than mine.