SILENT WOMEN

[Guest Butero]

 

check mate. 

 

Your arrogance is astounding...

There’s a flaw, see while you freely admit that a woman can be a priest – which is in fact a higher position than a deacon...so a woman can have a higher position than a deacon but she cant be in a lower position of a deacon?

 

Anyways lets carry on with your flaw

 

This is extremely easy to rebut InChrist.  Again, I have been through this argument before.  The word translated to servant is diakonia, and here is it's definition. 

 

 

 

Pride before the fall as they say my dear boy....

 

Your flaw.....Heres a hint cognates of diakonos

 

The Apostle Paul was consistent with how he used the word diakonoi (diakonos singular) in his letters, which is the direct word for the actual meaning of Deacon.  Like Luke in Acts, Paul in his letters applied the term to people who were involved in some kind of sacred commission.

 

 

Paul never used the word diakonia in Romans 16:1 when addressing Phoebe, which is the greek noun for service as you correctly state, nor did Paul even use the verb diakonew (as a participle) guess what Paul used instead....?????  Diakonon which is the Feminine word of diakonos (deacon)

 

• Diakonon singular (Deaconess Feminine)

 

• Diakonos singular (Deacon Masculine)

 

If Paul did not mean to imply she held an official church title, then he blundered badly, for his letter of recommendation, as it would have most naturally been read, leaves the Romans with the notion that he falsely inflated her resume. 

 

See Paul never met those Christians in Rome, he had done no prior ministry with them, nor had he established any of their house churches

 

Yip you still lacking I’m afriad

 

First of all, I never said a woman could be a priest, but I said they could be a preacher.  Higher position is irrelevant.  Apostle is a higher position that a Deacon, and I still say Paul wouldn't qualify as a Deacon since he is single.  Second, there was no flaw in what I said.  I gave you the word that was used, along with it's definition.  I also showed you that a woman cannot be the husband (aner) of one wife, so that tells me that in the instance where Phoebe was called diakonia, the correct English word was servant, not deacon.  In order for your argument be valid, that would mean there was a direct contradiction in the scriptures.  What you are saying is that since Phoebe was a deacon, the requirement of aner of one wife can't mean what it says.  It does mean what it says.  It means women can't be deacons.  So once again, you cannot come up with any way a woman can qualify as a Deacon or Bishop because they cannot be the husband (aner) of one wife. 

 

Check mate.

[Guest Butero]

The word that was translated to servant was diakonia.  It is referenced in Strong's Greek Dictionary as the word translated to servant.  I did use the correct word, and I would also point out that the translators decided to use servant as the best corresponding English word. 

 

Please show me where Paul calls Timothy a Bishop, and while you are at it, show me where scripture shows his marital status?  The burden of proof is on you to prove he was single.  And once again, you have yet to explain how a woman can be the aner of one wife.  Until you do, everything else you say is irrelevant.  It shows your lack of understanding, not only of Greek, but of English.  The word husband refers to a man. 

[Guest Butero]

butero

Please do me a favour could you please find me the word diakonia (servant) in Romans 16:1 ??? It appears your having issues with gramma hence your misunderstanding

I will repeat again the word in Romans 16:1 is diakonon it doesn't mean servant..its a feminine noun of diakonos which is the masculine noun and singular for the plural word diakonoi which is the direct translation of Deacon...don't believe me please go have a look at 1 Timothy 3:12

And while you at it please find me scripture of Timothy being married as Paul ordained him as a Bishop...

Again your argument are superficial and have shown you lack knowledge in understanding what Paul is really teaching as well as your use of grammar

Since you have decided to attack my use of grammar, let me point out a few obvious flaws in your post.  In your second sentence, you spelled grammar, gramma.  You failed to end the sentence with a period.  You failed to put a period in the first sentence of your second paragraph after the word diakonon, and then you failed to start a new sentence with a capital letter on the word "it."  You didn't put a period after the word servant in your second sentence, and then failed to start a new sentence with the word "It's."  In the next single sentence paragraph, you said, "And while you at it," instead of "while you are at it.  In the last sentence, you start out with "Again your argument are superficial."  You should have a coma after again, and you should have used the word "arguments" instead of "argument."  I know we all have our share of typos, but for you to accuse me of having issues with grammar while making all those mistakes in a single post is a joke. 

[OneLight]

Time for a break, or in junction to the title, silent men.

 

Take a breather and remember the ToS strictly prohibits personal attacks/insults ...