Did Paul Have a Woman as His Pastor? (Charisma News)

[PlanetChee]

1 hour ago, enoob57 said:

So you do not see the correlation of satan being the covering cherub and not wanting to remain there but to become God~ to that of the fact that man was created for God and the woman for man but the woman wanted to get between God and man and do the leading of man to God? 

If that's what you need to see go for it. That's a first for the garden story.If that's how you need to see it to think women are less than when God said we are all one in Christ in the new testament you should maybe read the new testament and pray to see things the way Jesus meant them to be seen. And gave his life to bring a new testimony to replace the old (testament) vision.

Cleaving to that was why the Sadducee and Pharisee's wanted Jesus dead. Blasphemy! False claims that he used demons to heal, etc... Jesus knew where their heart was. And he called them what they were. Then he died to deliver his Father's new testament to the world. 

Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

That is what God told Paul to tell the world. 

Paul's letters to his churches, as the article says, and with references to sustain the fact, were Paul's commands not God's. And for a reason. Paul would be contradicting God if he said, we are not all one in Christ. There are Jews, Greeks, bond, and free, male and female. We are not all one in Christ Jesus. 
But that isn't what he said. Now, after Paul was beheaded for his dedication to the truth of God, sacrificed for giving his life for the truth, there are those claiming the name of his savior and saying, Paul got it wrong when he wrote the letter to Galatia church. When it comes to the gender, the sexes, that's where we stop being one in Christ. 

Like I said, those who have been in service to God for centuries, female and male, demonstrate it is God's call. Not yours. 

Tell God he's wrong. Tell God you're going to take his word and refute what he said about gender equality. 

Meanwhile, the world moves on with women in power in politics and women in the pastoral seat in church. Those who God calls are called by God. Those who call that wrong are second guessing the one who delivered his word as to our identity in Christ. It was unity. Not division. Division was what troubled the world before Christ. We're the elect. How on God's earth could we then be divided because of our God given sex? 

We're all one in Christ Jesus. 
Those who say we're not? 

When God calls a man to preach we are not one in Christ when it is argued God will not call a woman too. 

[PlanetChee]

Bible Verses about Our Identity in Christ

Colossians 2:9-10

 Chapter Parallel Compare

9 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, 10 and in Christ you have been brought to fullness. He is the head over every power and authority.

[Willa]

I agree that Phoebe was a deaconess.  The follow details the calling of the first deacons.

Act 6:1 AMP NOW ABOUT this time, when the number of the disciples was greatly increasing, complaint was made by the Hellenists (the Greek-speaking Jews) against the [native] Hebrews because their widows were being overlooked and neglected in the daily ministration (distribution of relief).

Act 6:2  So the Twelve [apostles] convened the multitude of the disciples and said, It is not seemly or desirable or right that we should have to give up or neglect [preaching] the Word of God in order to attend to serving at tables and superintending the distribution of food.

Act 6:3  Therefore select out from among yourselves, brethren, seven men of good and attested character and repute, full of the [Holy] Spirit and wisdom, whom we may assign to look after this business and duty.

Act 6:4  But we will continue to devote ourselves steadfastly to prayer and the ministry of the Word.

Act 6:5  And the suggestion pleased the whole assembly, and they selected Stephen, a man full of faith (a strong and welcome belief that Jesus is the Messiah) and full of and controlled by the Holy Spirit, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolaus, a proselyte (convert) from Antioch.

Act 6:6  These they presented to the apostles, who after prayer laid their hands on them.

We see that the apostles were the pastors/bishops/elders/overseers who did the preaching and expounding on the word.  They chose deacons to serve tables and superintended the distribution of food so that the widows were not overlooked.  Stephen, the first martyr, was one of them.  And he certainly could preach a powerful message under the power of the Holy Spirit, which then got him stoned to death.  But that his primary duty as a deacon was to see that food be distributed to everyone.  Deacons took care of the business affairs of the church so that the pastors/bishops could preach the Word.  One of the qualifications of both was that they be the husband of one wife.  Yet we see that Phoebe was described as a deacon.  1 Timothy 3:1-13, Titus 1N:5-9

The guy who wrote the article is twisting the Scriptures to fit his beliefs and telling women what they want to hear.  Sorry.  

[Willa]

G1249   (Word Study)

διάκονος

diákonos; gen. diakónou, masc., fem. noun. A minister, servant, deacon. The derivation is uncertain. According to some it comes from diakónis, in the dust laboring, or running through dust. Others derive it from diákō, the same as diḗkō, to hasten, related to diṓkō, to pursue.

Also used in the NT as a technical term side by side with epískopos (G1985), bishop or overseer (1Ti 3:8, 1Ti 3:12; Php 1:1). The deacons in this sense were helping or serving the bishops or elders, and this is why they were probably called deacons. They did not, though, possess any ruling authority as did the elders. Tychicus was called a deacon in his relation to Paul (Eph 6:21; Col 4:7 [cf. Act 19:22]). The origin of this relationship is likely found in Act 6:1-4. Stephen and Phplip were deacons and were first chosen as distributors of alms and other forms of aid, but soon appeared alongside the Apostles and as their helpers and as evangelists (Act 6:8-10; Act 8:5-8). The care of the churches fell upon the deacons as the helpers of the elders who held distinct offices.

The only passage in which special officials of the church are mentioned is 1Ti 3:8-12. In verse eight it speaks of diakónous which undoubtedly refers to male deacons because the adjectives that are used in the verse such as semnoús (G4586), grave, are in the masc. pl. and not in the fem. In verse eleven the KJV gives an interpretation and not a translation when it says, "Even so must their wives be grave." The Gr. says, "women likewise grave" (a.t.). The NIV also has that translation. The NASB has the preferred translation, "Women [must] likewise [be] dignified [or grave]." It is impossible to determine whether the Apostle Paul is speaking of women in general in verse eleven or the wives of the deacons.

The only possible reference to a woman as a deacon is Rom 16:1-2, although the word diákonon may just as well be translated "servant." In this regard we must note that the story of the early church significantly begins with the inclusion of women in the apostolic meetings for prayer (Act 1:14). Their presence and activity are clearly illustrated by the references to Tabitha (Act 9:36), Mary the mother of John Mark (Act 12:12), Lydia (Act 16:14), Damaris (Act 17:34), and Priscilla (Act 18:2). The story of SapPhpra (Act 5:7 f.) implies the comparatively independent membership and responsibility of women within the Christian community. Priscilla illustrates their active evangelism (Act 18:26). Attention is expressly called to the "multitudes" of women converts added to the church (Act 5:14). In Php 4:2-3 Euodias and Syntyche (both women) are spoken of as fellow laborers of the Apostle Paul, and in 1Co 1:11 Chloe is mentioned as having reported to Paul the condition of the church at Corinth. In Rom 16:1-3, Rom 16:6, Rom 16:12-13, Rom 16:15 we have numerous salutations to women. Nevertheless, aside from the normal and expected involvement of women in a wide range of church activities and auxiliary ministries, they are never found to be holding ordained offices or engaging in the work of those positions.

[SchmaltzWeasel]

4 hours ago, enoob57 said:

I have also notice the homosexuals use the bigot campaign in their push for what they feel in their ownselves as right also   Let God have the authority and return to His Word....

That's beneath a Christian. To imply someone is a homosexual here is against the rules I'm sure. You just lost your argument. 

[SchmaltzWeasel]

4 hours ago, PlanetChee said:

Yes, but the sexist drivel at this point doesn't realize itself. And that fact that it is a repeating sin is a tragedy for those sinners who claim Christ. 

You just had someone compare your argument to homosexuals tactics. Anyone who does that can never argue from the standpoint of the word or the church. 
There are very ignorant people in the church . They read the Bible but they don't know a thing about the writings within the Bible. Nor the disciplines that scholars commit to in order to rightly divide the word. You're attempting to argue with worldly ideology opposed to women. We know Jesus condemned this and walked opposed to the traditions of his people when he included women as his disciples. 

You'll not change the mind that has turned to stone. That which condemns women condemns the same God that calls women to his service. Those women called outnumber the worldly opposed to the truth within the word that is God. And as such every single woman in service to God proves that cache of opponents of women and God false trumpeters misrepresenting the truth of Christ. And of all things, his own example. Women traveled with him. Be careful! That'll be called not true too. Maybe they were lesbians. I hear that's a tactic. 

Edited May 31, 2017 by SchmaltzWeasel

[simplejeff]

15 minutes ago, SchmaltzWeasel said:

That's beneath a Christian. To imply someone is a homosexual here is against the rules I'm sure. You just lost your argument. 

'Probie'? or 'Newbie' ?  'obviously' ?

After a few months here, or sooner,   you will see a lot of 'closet' sinners ('hidden') here , some members for a long long time (many years).   Every now and then they openly admit it. (yes, believe it or not)......

Perhaps actually the problem is not with the sinners,   nor even with the 'closet'(hidden) sinners,  per se,  but in the lack of repentance, and perhaps worse the lack of conviction of sin/ being sinful willingly / very visible in their posts....  and perhaps still worse the insidious wooing over,  the enticement openly and in private messages and in referrals,  to drag others in to the sin with them, to drag them down in defilement and corruption, as if it is "okay" behavior,  as is likewise practiced worldwide in many places.  

"Imply" someone is a sinner ?   No, don't do that - don't have to.  They will be revealed, just watching their posts, eventually if not sooner,  God Willing.....

Remember the internet is "fair game" for sinners,  and not a safe house for little children nor for seekers who are seeking the kingdom of heaven.   (far far more deception than reality or truth most everywhere, including basically all places on the internet, "obviously" )

Just as Jesus said "beware....",  and as Jesus did not trust men because He knew what is in men(everywhere),  do not trust anonymous entities on the internet...

[SchmaltzWeasel]

1 hour ago, simplejeff said:

'Probie'? or 'Newbie' ?  'obviously' ?

After a few months here, or sooner,   you will see a lot of 'closet' sinners ('hidden') here , some members for a long long time (many years).   Every now and then they openly admit it. (yes, believe it or not)......

Perhaps actually the problem is not with the sinners,   nor even with the 'closet'(hidden) sinners,  per se,  but in the lack of repentance, and perhaps worse the lack of conviction of sin/ being sinful willingly / very visible in their posts....  and perhaps still worse the insidious wooing over,  the enticement openly and in private messages and in referrals,  to drag others in to the sin with them, to drag them down in defilement and corruption, as if it is "okay" behavior,  as is likewise practiced worldwide in many places.  

"Imply" someone is a sinner ?   No, don't do that - don't have to.  They will be revealed, just watching their posts, eventually if not sooner,  God Willing.....

Remember the internet is "fair game" for sinners,  and not a safe house for little children nor for seekers who are seeking the kingdom of heaven.   (far far more deception than reality or truth most everywhere, including basically all places on the internet, "obviously" )

Just as Jesus said "beware....",  and as Jesus did not trust men because He knew what is in men(everywhere),  do not trust anonymous entities on the internet...

",  do not trust anonymous entities on the internet..." Do you include yourself there? 

[PlanetChee]

4 hours ago, Willa said:

G1249   (Word Study)

διάκονος

diákonos; gen. diakónou, masc., fem. noun. A minister, servant, deacon. The derivation is uncertain. According to some it comes from diakónis, in the dust laboring, or running through dust. Others derive it from diákō, the same as diḗkō, to hasten, related to diṓkō, to pursue.

Also used in the NT as a technical term side by side with epískopos (G1985), bishop or overseer (1Ti 3:8, 1Ti 3:12; Php 1:1). The deacons in this sense were helping or serving the bishops or elders, and this is why they were probably called deacons. They did not, though, possess any ruling authority as did the elders. Tychicus was called a deacon in his relation to Paul (Eph 6:21; Col 4:7 [cf. Act 19:22]). The origin of this relationship is likely found in Act 6:1-4. Stephen and Phplip were deacons and were first chosen as distributors of alms and other forms of aid, but soon appeared alongside the Apostles and as their helpers and as evangelists (Act 6:8-10; Act 8:5-8). The care of the churches fell upon the deacons as the helpers of the elders who held distinct offices.

The only passage in which special officials of the church are mentioned is 1Ti 3:8-12. In verse eight it speaks of diakónous which undoubtedly refers to male deacons because the adjectives that are used in the verse such as semnoús (G4586), grave, are in the masc. pl. and not in the fem. In verse eleven the KJV gives an interpretation and not a translation when it says, "Even so must their wives be grave." The Gr. says, "women likewise grave" (a.t.). The NIV also has that translation. The NASB has the preferred translation, "Women [must] likewise [be] dignified [or grave]." It is impossible to determine whether the Apostle Paul is speaking of women in general in verse eleven or the wives of the deacons.

The only possible reference to a woman as a deacon is Rom 16:1-2, although the word diákonon may just as well be translated "servant." In this regard we must note that the story of the early church significantly begins with the inclusion of women in the apostolic meetings for prayer (Act 1:14). Their presence and activity are clearly illustrated by the references to Tabitha (Act 9:36), Mary the mother of John Mark (Act 12:12), Lydia (Act 16:14), Damaris (Act 17:34), and Priscilla (Act 18:2). The story of SapPhpra (Act 5:7 f.) implies the comparatively independent membership and responsibility of women within the Christian community. Priscilla illustrates their active evangelism (Act 18:26). Attention is expressly called to the "multitudes" of women converts added to the church (Act 5:14). In Php 4:2-3 Euodias and Syntyche (both women) are spoken of as fellow laborers of the Apostle Paul, and in 1Co 1:11 Chloe is mentioned as having reported to Paul the condition of the church at Corinth. In Rom 16:1-3, Rom 16:6, Rom 16:12-13, Rom 16:15 we have numerous salutations to women. Nevertheless, aside from the normal and expected involvement of women in a wide range of church activities and auxiliary ministries, they are never found to be holding ordained offices or engaging in the work of those positions.

Did you find that last part below the Lexicon entry at the In Christ blog?

[PlanetChee]

2 hours ago, SchmaltzWeasel said:

You just had someone compare your argument to homosexuals tactics. Anyone who does that can never argue from the standpoint of the word or the church. 
There are very ignorant people in the church . They read the Bible but they don't know a thing about the writings within the Bible. Nor the disciplines that scholars commit to in order to rightly divide the word. You're attempting to argue with worldly ideology opposed to women. We know Jesus condemned this and walked opposed to the traditions of his people when he included women as his disciples. 

You'll not change the mind that has turned to stone. That which condemns women condemns the same God that calls women to his service. Those women called outnumber the worldly opposed to the truth within the word that is God. And as such every single woman in service to God proves that cache of opponents of women and God false trumpeters misrepresenting the truth of Christ. And of all things, his own example. Women traveled with him. Be careful! That'll be called not true too. Maybe they were lesbians. I hear that's a tactic. 

I think once someone believes their prejudice is sustained by God anything else is fair game. Pray. That's the best thing to do. I do agree with all that you've said. And thank you.