***
What does the Bible say about women in the church? Are wives inferior to men, to be controlled and ruled over by men? Does the Bible say women cannot lead or teach? Can they teach men?
***
Yesterday, I was reading an old article from Doug Wilson in which he mentioned this:
The Bible does give a father and husband true authority in his family. But it also gives the elders of the church true authority over that family.
Because Wilson self identifies as a Christian patriarch, I fully expect him to make comments like that, but I looked at the verse he referenced: Hebrews 13:17
17 Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you.
Having blogging about spiritual abuse for nearly two years, I would guess that this verse is the most widely twisted verse used by guru church leaders to help keep their flock in line. I’ve never been to seminary, but using simple Bible helps online, I was quickly able to learn that a better translation for the text using text would be:
Listen to or be persuaded by those who guide you and yield to them, for they watch out for your souls. . .(which I covered in this article a while back).
Another controversial verse which domineering men have used to exert their authority over women is 1 Timothy 2:12. The idea is that if it’s in the Bible written as such, we need to accept it as such.
A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;[b] she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one who was deceived, it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety. 1 Timothy 2:11-15.
Gail Wallace from The Junia Project blog wrote a very informative article, Defusing the 1 Timothy 2:12 Bomb, completely challenging the traditional school of thought which defends male-only leadership. Kudos to the men who decide to read a scholarly article written by a ::::woman::::.
Gail’s article is very interesting and questions the dogmatic teachings that we hear from so many church leaders today.
Here is one challenge:
Interpretation should be consistent with the rest of the passage under study. As Groothuis notes “It is inconsistent to regard the dress code in 1 Tim 2:9 as culturally relative, and therefore temporary, but the restriction on women’s ministry as universal and permanent. These instructions were part of the same paragraph and flow of thought.” Similarly, if we insist that verse 12 is applicable today, to be consistent, that ruling should apply to the whole passage, including verse 15 (women shall be saved through childbearing). I find it concerning that most people who claim that 1 Timothy 2:12 is clear and applies today usually don’t have a clue as to what the verses that follow mean and how they should be applied.
I encourage you all to read the article and see for yourself. Wallace’s conclusion:
The bottom line is that in light of current biblical scholarship it’s time to acknowledge that there are too many problems with this passage to continue using it as a weapon against women called to church ministry.
Be sure to read the great information in the comments. Please check it out.
***
Ok, along these lines, I found a video excerpt from Bishop N.T. Wright. In this video, Dick Staub interviews N.T. Wright following the release of his new book, Paul and the Faithfulness of God. In this short excerpt, the subject of women in the local church is addressed. (Sorry, I’m unable to embed the video.)
The basic idea is why are we using Paul’s words for final rules on authority? Why is the church making important church teachings based on maybe one verse of Paul’s without looking at the context of all of his other verses.
H/T to Bill Kinnon for the heads up on the N.T. Wright videos. The full interview with N.T. Wright can be found here: A Four-Part Conversation on N.T. Wright’s“Paul and the Faithfulness of God.”
**
Spiritual Sounding Board 
In addition to a lot of other nonsense he spouts, Q asks, “Isn’t submission an essence of Christianity?”
Actually, no. Jesus is the essence of Christianity.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“In addition to a lot of other nonsense he spouts, Q asks, “Isn’t submission an essence of Christianity?”
I think Q is mistaking Christianity for Islam. Submission IS the essence Islam. The Arabic word “Islam” means “submission”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Q,
You might be more comfortable in a mosque than in your church. Submission is an essence of Islam, or so I’ve heard.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yikes, Lydia! You beat me to it again.
LikeLike
Gary, I am just being a blog hog tonight. Got a bad cold and am chilling out. :o)
LikeLike
Also sick, Lydia. Well enough to hold my cell phone and post but not to do much else.
It just never made much sense to me that God would give me and other women gifts and then command us not to use them. Isn’t Jesus’s sacrifice enough or are additional sacrifices demanded of women?
LikeLike
Q
You had said:
“Jesus told His Disciples to go and baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. There is the divine order if you can accept it.”
My response:
So why did the Apostles only use the name of Jesus? By the way…what is the Holy Spirit? Just to re-iterate, the Apostles did use a name…Just ONE name. Jesus. They did not use a Phrase…the one Phrase that every one uses, i.e., “I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”. Why didn’t the Apostles use a phrase? Why did the Apostles use a name…why did they use only one name. How come they didn’t use the name of the Father? How come only the name of the Son?
The Son has the SAME authority as the Father. Jesus said that the Father was Greater than he…he did not use the word “authority”. That word isn’t even implied. So, as to all of my previous questions to you, why do you imply the word “authority”?
Ed
LikeLike
Q,
In my last I asked “What is the Holy Spirit?” What I meant to ask is “What is the NAME of the Holy Spirit, as it is used in the Phrase “I Baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit”
What is the name of the Father?
What is the name of the Son?
What is the name of the Holy Spirit?
But…the Apostles only used the name of the Son when they baptized. They didn’t use the name of Yahweh. Why? What does that tell you? There is biblical references to that if you want me to provide them.
Ed
LikeLike
Q –
No where in that phrase is an order implied. There is one God, not three with an order or hierarchy.
LikeLike
Subservience in role does not equate to subservience in essence.
Jesus is the eternal God, fully God, fully man.
The Father is God.
The Son Is God.
The Holy Spirit is God.
And they are one.
Yet
The Father is not the Son
The Son is not the Father.
The Father is not the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit is not the Father.
The Son is not the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit is not the Son.
It’s the Trinity.
What does ‘greater’ in John 14:28 mean? Larger, more…in what? Authority.
Again, Subservience in role does not equate to subservience in essence.
LikeLike
lydiasellerofpurple,
Probably a better typology of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is –
Abraham as the Father (willing to sacrifice his son) Issac as Christ willing to die (in obedience and by faith as he believed also) and Abraham’s servant as the Holy Spirit who went to seek a bride for the son, and Rebecca as the bride (willing to go without coercion).
LikeLike
Q
I do not believe in trinity. Therefore, I do not believe that the Father is not the Holy Spirit, or the Son is not the Father.
John 4:24 states, from the mouth of Jesus, “God is a spirit”.
We all acknowledge that Jesus is God. God (THE SPIRIT) in the flesh (OF MAN).
That is why we can say that Jesus is 100 %God (THE SPIRIT) as well as 100 % man (FLESH).
That body was not God. That body was man. That spirit is not man. That spirit is God.
The spirit is eternal. The body was mortal, as ours is. His body is now immortal. Jesus is the ONLY one immortal. God is immortal. The Bible states that. The only thing that is mortal or immortal is a body. Spirits are eternal. They cannot die. Therefore, the spirit (Father) is greater than the body (SON).
Liken all of this this way….IF your body needs water…YOUR MIND tells your body to get a drink of water. Are you “OBEDIENT” to your mind? Yes, you are…even if you change your mind, you are obedient to the change. Jesus always obeyed his spirit. His body…the Body of Christ…obeyed his own spirit (Father).
Again, there was only ONE NAME used when the Apostles Baptized people. They didn’t use Yahweh. They didn’t use the name of the Holy Spirit. By the way…what is the name of the Holy Spirit?
No, I do not see “authority” or anything subservient.
Ed
LikeLike
Ed,
Not believing in the Trinity is not orthodox Christianity.
LikeLike
Ed, Jesus prayed to His own Spirit?
Was He talking to Himself?
Was He Beside Himself (insane)?
Was His praying some kind of show?
No, you are mistaken, He was praying to the Father.
LikeLike
“Not believing in the Trinity is not orthodox Christianity.” – You got that right, Q.
Trinitarian doctrine is not child’s play, but it’s not rocket science either. It’s well-founded in the Bible and contrary understandings of the Father Son and Holy Spirit are not.
Tim
LikeLike
I know it goes against orthodox Christianity. But…who declared trinity to be orthodox? Just because they say orthodox doesn’t make it right. They were confused.
I cannot now, nor ever believe that three people play the role of one God.
First of all, we worship the God of the Jews. They don’t worship our God, we worship their God. They ALSO believe that the Holy Spirit is God. They certainly do not declare the Holy Spirit to be the second person of God. And yet, they believe in only one God. So, with all due respect, I think that trinity is heretical.
I do believe that the Father is God.
I do believe that the Son is God
I do believe that the Holy Spirit is God.
But I believe that they are all the same person…not persons (plural).
Father=Spirit
Son=Body
Holy Spirit=Mind of Christ
YOU are a spirit dressed in a body and you have a soul.
If you see…we are three in one. So is God. Not trinity. I will stand by that till the day I die…and I don’t care if it’s orthodox or not. I do not buy into the Apostles Creed, either. Why? Because I do not believe in a Holy Catholic Church. I am not Catholic. Where does the Bible declare creeds? In most ever church, there is a creed. There is a “WE BELIEVE” statements. Why? I don’t believe all of those “We believe” stuff. I am a Berean at heart, and I sure don’t see trinity in the Bible. Those who are dead tried to speak FOR me. They do not speak for me. I speak for me.
I search the scriptures. They want you to search the creeds.
Oh, and you have never spoken to your self? If you have, and everyone has, are you crazy? Are you insane? No…everyone speaks to themselves. Why is that even a question? Next you will ask me if Jesus is a ventrillaquist, too? God the spirit speaks, just as much as God the body spoke, too.
Our spirit prays, just as our mouth does, and that is based on what is in the mind. Our spirit speaks, feels, etc. We have two intellects within us. Our spirit is one, our soul is the other. It’s the same with God, since we are indeed in the image and likeness of God. If God is a trinity, then so are you. SPIRIT/SOUL/BODY. That is how I see trinity…not as a three persons…plural.
Ed
LikeLike
Ed, you’re embracing modalism. The Bible text doesn’t’ support that position: http://timfall.wordpress.com/2013/04/01/three-reasons-i-embrace-modalism-and-a-trinity-of-reasons-i-do-not/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tim,
I don’t care what you call it. I spelled it out. That is what I believe, and nothing will change my mind. I don’t base my beliefs on creeds, or blogs, or books, or this preacher or that preacher. I go only by the Bible. Period. How I laid out my argument above is how I believe. If that is what modelism is, which I don’t really know, nor do I care to know…then modelism it is. I would say that modelism believes what I believe, because I never researched what they believe.
Ed
LikeLike
Tim,
You state:
“The Bible text doesn’t’ support that position: ”
I disagree. I’ve gone thru this topic with a fine tooth comb, while most Christians will just “take the word of a creed”.
Ed
LikeLike
Ed, I’ve read and studied this for years, not taking it by creed but by Scripture. You and I disagree, but please don’t obliquely accuse me of not doing the heavy lifting.
LikeLike
Q says something I actually agree with: “when people truly love each other things work well.” Yet Q is obsesses with submission and authority. We won’t convince Q of his fundamental error, but his appearance here is useful. He is an illustration of the kind of authoritarian, enslaving personality we are well advised to avoid. If a supposed pastor spouts Q’s nonsense, run. If a woman is dating a man who embraces Q’s concepts of male dominance, run. If a woman is married to a man who relates to her abusively on the basis of such authoritarian nonsense, absolutely do not tolerate it. If necessary, find a shelter, then call the police.
LikeLike
With all due respect, Tim, I am not accusing you of anything. Most Christians believe in trinity. What I laid out is not the complete story. It is just a synopsis. I can get much deeper. I am very analytical. I know your talking points for the trinity. How anyone can see God in three persons is beyond me, to be honest. Now, if we really get down to it, the Holy Spirit got Mary pregnant. Therefore, the Father of Jesus is the Holy Spirit. The Father is a proxy father. That is just a rhetorical observation of mine. I did ask the tough questions and answer them.
I studied the Jehovah’s Witnesses for about 6 1/2 years. Not to be one, but just to see what makes them tick. They have a weird concept of the word “soul”. They thing that the body that Jesus resurrected in was a “spirit” body, instead of a “spiritual” body. I wanted to find out why they believe this stuff. 1 Thessalonians mentions three words with the word “and” in the middle of each spirit AND soul AND body. That study, which took a while, revealed much to me about ourselves. This was the beginning of my revelation about God, since we are created in His image, in His likeness. If we are those three words, then so is He.
Like I said…that was just the beginning. There is a whole bunch more. Take for instance, John 10:30…”I and the Father are one”.
Some Christians insert a word in that verse, making it say, “in agreement”, or something like that. But it doesn’t say that. So, I wanted to find out the definition of that word “one”. Did you know that there are more uses of the word one that has a different definition?
John 10:16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.
Each of those one’s is a different definition.
In the case of John 10:30, the definition is: A numeral. Well, 1 as a numeral is defined as: A single Unit.
I and the Father are a single unit. That was another revelation to me.
***************
Next, I took a look at THE BODY of Christ. We are the body of Christ on Earth. Jesus is the Body of Christ in heaven.
OUR spirit is IN the Body of Christ. Christ’s spirit is in us. Did you know that the Holy Spirit is ONLY that Jesus asked the Father to send is Jesus own spirit? The Spirit of his Son is how it is worded.
We know that Jesus is Lord and there is not a second Lord, there is only one Lord. Scripture states “Now the Lord is that Spirit…and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty”.
Now, back to the Body of Christ, it is said in the Bible, THERE IS ONE SPIRIT AND THERE IS ONE BODY. Pretty interesting stuff to study. This also relates to James 2:26…for as the body is dead without the spirit…
Then I took a look at the word “LIFE”. Life requires a body. Without a body, you are dead. We have a LIVING God. That tells me that God has a body. God often speaks of his own “soul” in the Hebrew scriptures, so that tells me that God has a soul. And, John 4:24 Jesus states that God is a spirit. But we know that Jesus is God. How is that if Jesus is not a spirit? Ahhh, but God is “IN” Jesus. That is what makes Jesus God. The Father was “IN” Jesus. We don’t have the Father “IN” us. We have the Holy Spirit “in” us. Jesus is in heaven, and yet scripture states that we have Jesus “in” us. Again, scripture states that the Father was “IN” Jesus, and yet, time and time again, Jesus would say “Father, which is in heaven”. So, we have the Father in TWO PLACES AT THE SAME TIME.
But there is so much more, too. Emanuel. God with us. God (SPIRIT) “IN” a BODY.
Oh, and in regards to Logos…Oh my goodness. There is so much even in that. We can’t really say Logos without first knowing its real definition.
Logos is defined as “SPOKEN word, including thought”.
Did you know that we must give an “account” to God? Did you know that the word “account” is the word “LOGOS”?
You have heard the phrase “My word against your word”. One of those words is Logos, and the other word is Rhema.
If I speak my word, that originates from my own mind, that is logos. But if I speak your word that originated from your own mind, that is rhema.
The Bible is known as the Word of God. That is Logos. Jesus is Logos. The Word of God is the words of Jesus, as it all originated from his own mind. It wasn’t from a trinity concept of the Father’s mind…but that of Jesus’ mind only. I know the trinity concept of Logos, as being two different people being “face to face”…that isn’t what I see.
So, in closing, while all of you trinity Christians are concentrating on verses…I go much deeper. I analyze things much deeper. It’s easy to read the bible, but it takes time and effort to study it.
Ed
________________________________
LikeLike
Q says, “Subservience in role does not equate to subservience in essence.”
It is true that “[T]he body does not consist of one member but of many.” (1 Corinthians 12:14, ESV). Still, if I were to suggest that the body part describing Q’s function is the anal sphincter, I would be assigning him a place that is subservient in essence as well as in role.
Now, nobody is saying that anybody is an anal sphincter, but the doctrine espoused by people like Q effectively assigns women to a role that is subservient in essence as well as in role. Their doctrine, being devoid of love, is contemptible. Avoid such people.
LikeLike
Ed, you said “So, in closing, while all of you trinity Christians are concentrating on verses…I go much deeper. I analyze things much deeper. It’s easy to read the bible, but it takes time and effort to study it.” I’ll just say that you’re not the only one who takes the time and effort to study.
Blessings on you,
Tim
LikeLike
You as well, Tim. Thanks.
Ed
________________________________
LikeLike
Gentlemen (Tim and Ed): Very respectful debate on a challenging topic. Nicely done!
LikeLike
“Q says, “Subservience in role does not equate to subservience in essence”
It did not work well with Jim Crow, either. It is the basically the same thinking when you strip away the high sounding words. This is also the slogan for comp doctrine.
Here is where I believe the biggest difference is in all of this: How we view God.
If we start with our view as power then that naturally flows into such things as Chain of Being (It is really Pagan Greek Philosophy), pecking orders, subservience not only in the Trinity but a pecking order in all human relationships. There are some who cannot imagine life without the pecking order.And that is why God’s Sovereinty is the most important aspects of Reformed theology.
However, I believe if we start with viewing God as love, mercy, justice… we end up in a very different place. And that place is what the Body of Christ is to be like. Not the “world” as in don’t lord it over as the Gentiles do.
reformers do not start with the redemption aspect of Christ…how it was to be before the fall becauwe they are determinist and it does not matter. They start with Plato but don’t realize it.
It is too lengthy to get into here but Christiaity moved away from it’s Hebrew thinking roots which changed how God is viewed. Some think that a good thing but they miss a larger picture. Christendom took on much of the Greek Platonist thinking that is pagan and basically separates us from God in more ways than one. The Reformers hated Jews and treated them horribly except when using them. They have basically presented Jesus Christ as a European Gentile and it has colored our understanding of so much.
As far as the pecking order in the Trinity is concerned (or subservience as Q calls it), what do we do with Isaiah 9:
For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given,
and the government will be on his shoulders.
And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Wait. Messiah is going to be called Everlasting Father/Mighty God? Wonderful Counselor? The first are names Name for God the Father, the other a Name for the Holy Spirit. Right?
What is going on here?
How we view Yahweh has so much to do with how we live, how we view abuse, how we see people, their worth, etc. And how we view evil/sin! It is important
LikeLike
Excellent Lydia! (although I don’t expect you will be receiving qudos from our current proponent of misogynistic doctrinal bigotry).
It took us the better part of 2 millinnia to reject Paul’s acceptance and enabling of slavery. I do hope it doesn’t take that long for people like Q (as in Q’aran?), to reject Paul’s supposed misogynistic views regarding women. I say “supposed” because I hold out hope that Q and Q’s Qind (including the translators), have misrepresented Paul’s teaching.
Q: If you will qondescend to answer, are you male or female? To tell you truth, based on the content of the doctrine you espouse and the manner of your presentation, I am assuming you are male. If not, I would like to know. If you happen to be female I would deem it appropriate to respond to your positions more with pity than with the Qontempt they deserve if you are male.
LikeLike
The Trinity as a concept is difficult and confusing to many people. (And Mohammed misunderstood it as Father Son and Holy Mother [Mary]! which is part of why we have Islam out there. The word does not appear in scripture and the scripture, which can be interpreted to either support or deny the idea of an ongoing Trinity.
My bottom line: Believe in the Trinity is not necessary for salvation. Believing that Jesus Christ was and is God, that he was God incarnate, died, buried and resurrected, is necessary for salvation. The old line Unitarians (before Universalists joined them) believed the scripture from the OT. “The Lord is One”.
LikeLike
Tim
You write @ FEBRUARY 11, 2014 @ 1:12 PM…
“I think the Bible does not prohibit women elders, pastors, etc.,
so they should be in leadership positions just as men.
I kinda agree. The Bible does NOT prohibit women… pastors/shepherds.
But – Neither does the Bible, or Jesus, say women, can, or should be pastors.
And – Neither does the Bible, or Jesus, say men, can, or should be pastors.
Now I cudda missed that. BUT – In the Bible…
I can NOT find one of His Disciples who called themself – pastor/leader.
In the Bible …
Can you name one Women who called herself – shepherd/leader?
Can you name one Women who had the “Title/Position – shepherd/leader?
Can you name one Women who was, Hired or Fired, as a – shepherd/leader?
Can you name one Man who called himself – shepherd/leader?
Can you name one Man who had the “Title/Position – shepherd/leader?
Can you name one Man who was, Hired or Fired, as a – shepherd/leader?
I do NOT find, Paid, Professional Pastors, in Pulpits, Preaching, to People, in Pews.
And, as far as “leadership positions,” (A term NOT found in the Bible.)
Jesus taught His Disciples NOT to be called Leader.
For you have “ONE” Leader – the Christ. Mat 23:10 NASB
And NOT one of His Disciples called themselves leader
ALL of His Disciples called themselves “Servants.”
And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold:
them also I must bring, and they shall “hear My voice; “
and there shall be “ONE” fold, and “ONE” shepherd.
John 10:16
One Voice – One Fold – One Shepherd – One Leader
{{{{{{ Jesus }}}}}}
LikeLike
Q – Tim
Have some questions about using the word “Trinity?”
First – “Trinity” is NOT in the Bible.
Second – There are different versions of the “Trinity.”
You have to explain which Tinity you’re talking about.
Some versions of the Trinity say there is hierarchy in the god head.
Some say No hierarchy – Father, Son, Holy Spirit are equal.
Some will NOT call God Three Persons. Three Persons is NOT in the Bible.
And calling God a person makes God sound so, errr, human.
Using “Trinity” does NOT explain all the differences.
To me, that’s the problem with using words NOT in the Bible…
Now you have to use other “Words” NOT in the Bible to explain them.
And now, folks can make that Non-Biblical Word, or term,
say, and mean, whatever they like.
And call it orthodox – When it’s NOT even in the Bible.
Maybe Trinity is just a Tradition of Men…
that Makes Void The Word of God. Mark 7:13.
What is popular is NOT always “Truth.”
What is “Truth” is NOT always popular.
LikeLike
Q – Tim
Q writes about the Trinity @ FEBRUARY 11, 2014 @ 8:04 PM…
And – I gots lots of questions… 😉
I can find scriptures that say…
(1) There is only one God.
(2) The Father is God.
(3) The Son is God.
(4) The Holy Spirit is God.
But have questions when you say
(5) The Father is not the Son.
….. The Son is not the Father
(6) The Son is the not the Holy Spirit.
….. The Holy Spirit is not the Son.
(7) The Holy Spirit is not the Father.
….. The Father is not the Holy Spirit.
Do you have any scriptures to show 5, 6, 7, is in the Bible?
Or is this just “traditions of men” that nullify “the Word of God?” Mk 7:13
Why not just use the scriptures?
Jesus said, I and the Father are “ONE.”
John said, “God is a Spirit.” Doesn’t “God” include Father, Son, Holy Spirit?
John said, The Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit are “ONE.”
1 – Could the Holy Spirit be the Father of Jesus?
Mat 1:18
Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise:
When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph,
before they came together,
**she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.**
Mat 1:20
…for that which is conceived in her **is of the Holy Ghost.**
Luke 1:35
And the angel answered and said unto her,
**The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee,**
… that holy thing which shall be born of thee
shall be called **the Son of God.**
2 – Could Jesus be the Everlasting Father in Isaiah 9:6?
If not Jesus, who is Isaiah 9:6 referring to as Everlasting Father?
Isaiah 9:6
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given:
and the government shall be upon his shoulder:
and **his name shall be called**
Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God,
**The everlasting Father,** The Prince of Peace.
3 – Could John the Baptist been preparing the way for Jehovah our Father, our Redeemer, our Savior,
And Jesus is the one who showed up?
John the Baptist only knew OT prophesy.
And he was to prepare the way of Jehovah our Elohim.
And Jesus showed up. Wouldn’t that mean – Jehovah = Jesus?
OT – Isaiah 40:3
The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness,
Prepare ye the way of the LORD, (Jehovah)
make straight in the desert a highway for our God. (Elohim)
NT - Mat 3:3
For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying,
The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord…
Wasn’t John the Baptist looking for Jehovah? Jehovah = Jesus?
4 – In the OT, Jehovah, and Jehovah Elohim, is also our Father.
And Jehovah is not only our Father, Jehovah is also our redeemer. Hmmm?
If Jehovah is our Father, our redeemer, and Jesus showed up? Jesus = Father?
Isaiah 63:16
…thou, O LORD { Jehovah }, art **our father,** ** our redeemer;**
thy name is from everlasting.
Isaiah 64:8
But now, O LORD, { Jehovah } thou [art] **our father**…
1Chronicles 29:10
…Blessed [be] thou, LORD God { Jehovah Elohiym } of Israel **our father**…
Hmmm?
1 – Seems The Holy Spirit could be the Father of Jesus.
2 – Seems Jesus, the Son, is called the Everlasting Father.
3 – Seems John the Baptist was preparing the way for Jehovah
our elohim, our Father, our Redeemer, our Saviour, and Jesus showed up.
And the list goes on, and on, and….
Nah! I think your thinking needs to be “Reformed.”- Or thrown out…
I’m Blest… I’ve returned to the Shepherd and Bishop of my soul…
Jer 50:6
“My people” hath been “lost sheep:”
**their shepherds** have caused them to *go astray,*
1 Pet 2:25
For ye were as *sheep going astray;*
BUT are now returned to the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.
I’m Blest… I’ve returned to the Shepherd and Bishop of my soul…
{{{{{{ Jesus }}}}}}
LikeLike
I have borrowed an excerpt from Alison Rowan’s comment responding to someone on a LinkedIn thread entitled: “Are women Biblically permitted to be pastors? What does God say in His Word about the role of women in leadership in the church (as pastors/elders)?” Alison nails it!
“God is still DEMONSTRATING His Heart and will today, by His sovereign choice of whom He anoints to minister and endorses by granting good fruit. I said it earlier, but will keep repeating, that there will always be much disputing over the WORDS of the Book, because of the puny grasp we mortals can grope for in trying to understand the Mind of God exclusively from the pages.
BY HIS ACTIONS, God demonstrated in Jesus, what He is like–the Jews just couldn’t ‘get’ Him by studying the scrolls alone.
BY HIS ACTIONS, God silenced the Jewish believers–adamant that the God-breathed Scriptures were infallible and eternal and to be obeyed–by his ACTIONS! He proved His acceptance of the Gentiles without keeping the ‘God-breathed scriptures’ by anointing them with the Holy Spirit… a sovereign, divine initiative!
BY HIS ACTIONS–TODAY, God demonstrates His acceptance of women in ministry of ALL sorts by anointing them with the Holy Spirit to do His will….His choice proven by GOOD, lasting fruit. Equally a sovereign divine initiative!
Who are we to resist God? Who are we to condemn what God approves?
Who are we to ‘put Words in God’s mouth’, when He speaks the opposite, loud and clear, by his ACTIONS?
If anyone insists on that unyielding adamancy, they will HAVE to conclude that all that has been achieved by women ministers, is the work of Beelzebub!
Do you agree?”
Alison has provided a concise and excellent response. It is thoughtful and encourages people to see a broader perspective of how God deals with men and women in, and through Christ, today.
LikeLike
Gary W comments are flippant and are being used to elicit emotions to sway people from being thoughtful.
This is already an emotional topic and his actions should be seen for what they are.
LikeLike
“Probably a better typology of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is –
Abraham as the Father (willing to sacrifice his son) Issac as Christ willing to die (in obedience and by faith as he believed also) and Abraham’s servant as the Holy Spirit who went to seek a bride for the son, and Rebecca as the bride (willing to go without coercion).”
Must have missed this earlier. Who says it is a typology of Father, Son and Holy Spirit? All the orthodox scholars?
We so easily forget that Abram was a pagan, grew up around Pagans before God called him to leave. Child sacrifices were not uncommon in Pagan tribes. Yahweh was showing him something alright….that the ONE TRUE GOD is different. And it was common practice to marry from your own tribe.
Think of what you are really suggesting when it comes to the Cross and this typology/pecking order. You are taking the fact that Jesus’ humanity made him dread the suffering…… so that means He could only go to the cross by obeying God the Father. Doing what Daddy said. Cosmic child sacrifice. (the difference is Jesus KNEW the Cross was coming. Issac was in the dark until he got there)
That was Yahweh Incarnate on that cross. Otherwise it is all meaningless as He was just following orders.
A really word study on Phil 2 should be done because so many translations get it wrong and the ESS folks turn it on it’s ear. Ironically the Message does it well (GASP–the heretical Message!):
5-8 Think of yourselves the way Christ Jesus thought of himself. He had equal status with God but didn’t think so much of himself that he had to cling to the advantages of that status no matter what. Not at all. When the time came, he set aside the privileges of deity and took on the status of a slave, became human! Having become human, he stayed human. It was an incredibly humbling process. He didn’t claim special privileges. Instead, he lived a selfless, obedient life and then died a selfless, obedient death—and the worst kind of death at that—a crucifixion.
What is your picture of God? Is it a determinist distant deity controlling every molecule including Jesus Incarnate?. Or is it Jesus Christ? God in the Flesh. God with us.
See, I think part of the problem are all the creeds (which came about politically and were more about control) that have us focusing on a syllabus type Jesus. Check off the list of beliefs. What about the real life Jesus in-between birth and Cross/resurrection? I don’t think some Christians much like that Jesus because the only people He gave a hard time to were the current religious leaders who loved the pecking order and perks of their “position”. Jesus was ruining their gig.
Some lessons go unlearned with current “religious” leaders.
LikeLike
The doctrine of the Trinity of God is fundamental to the Christian faith, belief or disbelief in the Trinity marks orthodoxy from unorthodoxy.
The reason the term same in Essence (rather than substance) is used in Christian doctrine is to support the equality (divine attributes) and also emphasizes that the Three Persons of the Trinity do not act independently of one another (Oneness). Jesus rebuffed the charges of the Jews with this theme.
The Trinity can be seen in the baptism of Jesus in Mark 1:9-11.
So saying “Subservience in role does not equate to subservience in essence” is like saying Jesus being equal with God in every way willingly humbled himself taking the role of a servant (not independently of the Godhead) and came in the flesh to rescue sinners.
Shouldn’t Christians have the same attitude as Christ?
Philippians 2:5-8
5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. 8 Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
Why is it so offensive to humble ourselves and take the role God has for us?
LikeLike
“Gary W comments are flippant and are being used to elicit emotions to sway people from being thoughtful.
This is already an emotional topic and his actions should be seen for what they are.”
Q, You are giving yourself away. Now it is about “emotions”?. And of course you think the readers here are emotional, not thoughtful which means Gary is leading them astray? Give me a break. Nice try. You don’t think much of commenters here, do you?
LikeLike
“Why is it so offensive to humble ourselves and take the role God has for us?”
False dichotomy. You assume that those who do not agree with your take on the issue (you call them “roles” which is a huge mistake there) cannot be humble. They are rebellious, then? Prideful? :Puffed up because they disagree with you?. Typical. Sheesh. The more you write the more you sound like CJ Mahaney or Gothard. So it boils down to one can be humble if they agree with your interpretations. Man centered, my friend. No thanks.
All true believers have “anointing” (1 John). The Holy Spirit defines my “role” (which is a word denoting “pretend” or “act” anyway and a terrible way to view it) not your interpretation.
LikeLike
If orthodoxy is defined as accepting some creed that is not fully biblical, why be orthodox. It is only that some group of self-appointed men decided on a political basis that x is orthodox and y is not, usually because the advocates of y where not in the power group at the time and were being popular in some segment of the known world. Given all of the denominations determining their own definition of orthodoxy, almost everyone is unorthodox on something or other.
BTW. the word catholic in the creeds does not refer to the RCC, but to the “church universal”. The problem I have is with the word “apostolic” which indicates an acceptance of an inheritance from an original apostle through a line of leaders through centuries to the present day, handing down the “orthodox” faith from generation to generation. In other words, to quote Tevye: “TRADITION” uber alles.
Not to my taste. One does not have to believe in the trinity (a non-biblical term, btw) to believe that Jesus Christ was God in the flesh, died, was buried, rose and ascended and will come again to take his own with him to heaven, and that I (or whoever) accept this gift of forgiveness and grace and will live serving Him. And that is what it requires to be a Christian, not belief in a trinity that no one can explain very well.
LikeLike
Gary W, how many logical fallacies have you used in your comments, and what is the purpose?
LikeLike
Q
you write…
“Why is it so offensive to humble ourselves and take the role God has for us?”
Yes – And it would be good example for you to take your own advice…
And – Humble yourself before the commenters here – and learn from them.
You could exhibt – Lowliness of mind? Phil 2:3 KJV
And be, Esteeming others “better” than yourself? Phil 2:3 KJV
And, consider – Submitting “One to Another?” Eph 5:21 KJV, 1 Pet 5:5 KJV
Also, Prefering others before yourself? Rom 12:10 KJV
Also, Being clothed with humility? 1 Pet 5:5 KJV
Humility – Dictionary – a modest or low view of one’s own importance.
You just might learn sumptin from us who you consider un-orthodoxy folks.
Who reject a lot of what you have to say…
Because most here have been where you are today…
And your so-called ortodoxy proved, over time, to be lacking, wrong, lies…
And – Who are NO longer in bondage to “the Tradtions of man”
that we were taught in “The Corrupt Religious System” of today.
Ps 138:6
Though the LORD be high, yet hath he respect unto the lowly:
but the proud he knoweth afar off.
Ps 40:4
Blessed is that man that maketh the LORD his trust,
and respecteth not the proud, nor such as turn aside to lies.
LikeLike
Orthodoxy is important when subjects have been clearly thought out and provide a foundation for sound doctrine, it is now in vogue to question every thing which is fine but when you just tear everything apart and leave nothing in its place it is destructive.
LikeLike
“Gary W, how many logical fallacies have you used in your comments, and what is the purpose?”
Q, Does this sort of thing actually work in your neck of the woods?
LikeLike
“Orthodoxy is important when subjects have been clearly thought out and provide a foundation for sound doctrine, it is now in vogue to question every thing which is fine but when you just tear everything apart and leave nothing in its place it is destructive.”
You have all the right words to be inducted into the Reformed hall of fame. The problem is history tells a much different story about the results of “orthodoxy” or “sound doctrine”. What was considered “orthodox” by centuries of “religious leaders” brought about a long era of dead bodies, torture, banishment, war as God Shield, etc, etc. It was a horrible bloody mess. That is your “orthodoxy”. That is “creedal” living.
Thank God for our Founding Theists who believed in “individual” rights and separation of church/state. So no more Calvins, Cromwells, Divine right of kings, etc….which WAS considered orthodoxy and “sound doctrine”, remember?
It is YOUR opinion that some here leave “nothing” in the place of what you consider “orthodoxy”.
LikeLike
I despise anyone who believes that women are subservient “less thans” merely because of the gender/body parts they were born with. We are not sub-human. We are not less than. We are not born to serve those who were blessed enough to be born with male parts. They are not kings over us, to dominate and rule over us…especially in churches and homes.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Q
Your orthodoxy, your sound doctrine, comes from man – NOT the Bible.
What good is it?
Your orthodoxy, your sound doctrine, says…
(5) The Father is not the Son.
….. The Son is not the Father
(6) The Son is the not the Holy Spirit.
….. The Holy Spirit is not the Son.
(7) The Holy Spirit is not the Father.
….. The Father is not the Holy Spirit.
But – You can NOT show scripture that says this.
Because – It comes from man – NOT the Bible.
I show you scripture that refutes your orthodoxy.
And you do NOT answer.
1 – Could the Holy Spirit be the Father of Jesus?
Mat 1:18
Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise:
When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph,
before they came together,
**she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.**
Mat 1:20
…for that which is conceived in her **is of the Holy Ghost.**
Luke 1:35
And the angel answered and said unto her,
**The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee,**
… that holy thing which shall be born of thee
shall be called **the Son of God.**
2 – Could Jesus be the Everlasting Father in Isaiah 9:6?
If not Jesus, who is Isaiah 9:6 referring to as Everlasting Father?
Isaiah 9:6
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given:
and the government shall be upon his shoulder:
and **his name shall be called**
Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God,
**The everlasting Father,** The Prince of Peace.
3 – Could John the Baptist been preparing the way for Jehovah our Father, our Redeemer, our Savior,
And Jesus is the one who showed up?
The Bible says – The Holy Spirit is the Father of Jesus, the Son.
Q says, his tradtion says, (7) The Holy Spirit is not the Father.
The Bible says, Jesus, The Son, His name is, The Everlasting Father.
Q says, his tradtion says, (5) The Son is not the Father.
The Bible says, John the Baptist prepared the way for Jehovah, our Father.
And Jesus, The Son, showed up.
Q says, his tradtion says, (5) The Father is not the Son.
LikeLike
Q
Your orthodoxy, your sound doctrine says…
(5) The Father is not the Son.
….. The Son is not the Father
But – There is Jesus, in Revelations, Calling Himself…
The Root of David – And the offspring of David.
Revelations 22:16 I Jesus… I am the root and the offspring of David…
Jesus: – The Root of David and the offspring of David.
Jesus: – Father of David, Son of David.
Jesus: – I and The Father are One.
LikeLike
despise anyone who believes that women are subservient “less thans” merely because of the gender/body parts they were born with. We are not sub-human. We are not less than. We are not born to serve those who were blessed enough to be born with male parts. They are not kings over us, to dominate and rule over us…especially in churches and homes.”
Waiting, Dontcha get it? You are to believe you are equal in “essence” but not in living real life. The cognitive dissonance in this ruse is astounding but folks actually buy into it. See, You gotta play the “role” some mere human says is in the Bible. Ignore your inner Holy Spirit.
LikeLike
Ummmmm…but I’m “living in real life” at this moment in time. I’ve been abused physically, sexually, emotionally,spiritually and psychologically all my life by misogynists. I’m done with them. I’m a real person with real worth, and am loved just as equally by God as any “brother”. 😦
LikeLike
1 – Could the Holy Spirit be the Father of Jesus?
Mat 1:18
Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise:
When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph,
before they came together,
**she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.**”
Very good point, Amos. A serious problem for the pecking order Trinity. I asked way up thread Who the Holy Spirit reports to in the pecking order. Crickets. I have asked this of every ESS type in my neck of the woods and…… crickets. They tend to ignore the Holy Spirit in real life anyway as the gurus want to be the Holy Spirit for us.
SBTS teaches this stuff and I am at ground zero. It is all over the Reformed resurgence.
LikeLike
“I’m done with them. I’m a real person with real worth, and am loved just as equally by God as any “brother”. 😦 ”
yes you are— and not just in “essence” But….IN REAL LIFE as a “full heir”. Good for you. I am done with the silliness, too. This stuff is taught to prop up gurus who want to control people. It is a death culture. Not a “life” culture.
LikeLiked by 1 person
lydiasellerofpurple, So then you agree with Gary W’s tactics?
Here is just a few examples of Gary W’s logical fallacy usage –
“if I were to suggest that the body part describing Q’s function is the anal sphincter”
“Their doctrine, being devoid of love”
“Q is obsesses with submission and authority”
“I don’t expect you will be receiving qudos from our current proponent of misogynistic doctrinal bigotry”
“people like Q (as in Q’aran?)”
These statement are untrue and SAD.
Ed did not agree with me and did not make these types of statements.
Ironic that a sight about abuse attracts people that comment and ostensibly support the statements like the above.
LikeLike
Q, your theological doctrine of submission and subservience leads to abuses and death for those who are not in the dominating “roles”. I’ll just follow Jesus, instead of the doctrines of men, thank you very much.
LikeLike
waitingforthetrumpet2
“I’ll just follow Jesus, instead of the doctrines of men, thank you very much.”
Me too… 🙂
MY Sheep – Hear MY Voice – and – They Follow Me. John 10:27.
LikeLike
Q (as in Susie?) appears to have her (his?) panties tied in a wad over my qomments. Well, good. It gives me the opportunity to explain that I am not partiqularly inqlined to taqe anyone seriously if they are expressing views derived from misogynistiq twisting of Scripture. I hold their arguments in the same low esteem as the astonishingly similar arguments espoused by southern slave owners prior to the Ameriqan Civil War. Indeed, Q’s arguments are distressingly similar to the arguments I personally heard until we were well into the civil rights movement.
Still, I may be wrong. Perhaps Jesus was mistaqen when He advised us not to toss pearls before swine. Maybe He sinned when He qalled the religious leaders snaqes and whitewashed tombs. Maybe Jesus missed an opportunity when he failed to engage these vipers and whitewashed tombs in meaningful dialogue.
Not.
Mod note: This comment really tweaqed out your moderator’s eyes/brain. Left as is. 🙂
LikeLike
JA,
Don’t you mean “tweaqed?” Just a Cuestion.
LikeLike
Gary W.: I must have changed the spelling just as you were commenting – haha!
oops, qommenting.
LikeLike
No Gary W, your comments are not like Christ who is all knowing and actually knew men’s motives and hearts, they are designed to be disrespectful sway emotions on an already emotional topic.
You want to pretend it is humor but it is not, what is funny is how people with anonymity will say things they would never say to someones face.
LikeLike
Q
Lighten up…
Gary’s qomment was really funny – Even you have to admit…
““if I were to suggest that the body part describing Q’s function
is the anal sphincter”
I had to look up “sphincter” – and I chuckled…
Why do you NOT just stick to the topic at hand. Make your points…
And – Answer some of the questions – maybe?
I get called lots of stuff, lots of labels, from the “reformed” crowd.
Gotta have “church leaders” crowd.
Gotta have “pastor/leaders” crowd.
But – when I ask questions they can NOT, will NOT, answer…
They change the subject. They want to talk about me…
I just keep asking questions…
I’ll ask you – A few simple questions…
In the Bible – How many of His Disciples called themself – pastor/leader?
How many of His Disciples had the “Title/Position” – pastor/leader?
How many of His Disciples were, Hired or Fired as a – pastor/leader?
NO one likes to answer these simple questions… 😉
I wonder why? 😉
When you believe the lie you start to die…
LikeLike
Q
Are you a pastor/leader?
Are you an elder/overseer?
What “leadership position” do you hold in the
501 (c) 3, Non-profit, Tax $ Deductible, Religious $ Corporation,
That the IRS calls church?
Prying hearts want to know… ;-0
LikeLike
Q
You write @ FEBRUARY 11, 2014 @ 12:37 PM…
“According to the bible men have the role of leadership in the church,”
NOPE – NOT according to the Bible…
Leadership, role of leadership, is NOT mentioned in the Bible….
This is your orthodoxy? Your sound doctrine?
Saying things are “According to the bible” – When they are NOT in the Bible?
And NOT one of His Disciples called themselves leader – In The Bible.
But, I cudda missed that.
Can you name one of His disciples who called themselves – Leader?
Can you name one of His disciples talking about – Leadership in the church?
What is popular is NOT always “Truth.”
What is “Truth” is NOT always popular.
LikeLike
No body has responded to my last post above.
LikeLike
Q
Your orthodoxy, your sound doctrine…
Is quite suspect… Much of your orthodoxy NOT in the Bible…
Sounds to me like you’re promoting “Traditions of men” developed in
“The Corrupt Religious System” – Oy Vey!!!
LikeLike
Amos,
You want to know if Q is a pastor/leader/elder/overseer? I hope s/he responds but, good grief, I can’t even get him to say whether s/he is male of female.
And, did you notice how Q is attempting to hide behind the old “you don’t know my heart” ploy? Where is that in the Bible? Sometimes these people just SO do not want to be exposed for who they really are. Well, maybe Q isn’t an attitudinal misogynist, but his views on how to treat women certainly fly in the face of Jesus’ command to love one another.
LikeLike
A. Amos Love, Now look up the word flippant and you will know why I wont lighten up on Gary W.
As far as your questions go –
“I’ll ask you – A few simple questions…
In the Bible – How many of His Disciples called themself – pastor/leader?
How many of His Disciples had the “Title/Position” – pastor/leader?
How many of His Disciples were, Hired or Fired as a – pastor/leader?”
None, Peter did call himself an Elder.
“Are you a pastor/leader?
No.
Are you an elder/overseer?”
No.
“What “leadership position” do you hold in the
501 (c) 3, Non-profit, Tax $ Deductible, Religious $ Corporation,
That the IRS calls church?”
None.
Now let me ask you –
What current popular Christian figure/figures do you most agree with?
What Christian books if any would you recommend?
Do you attend church and if so which one/ones?
LikeLike
Waitingforthetrumpet, you betcha you are a real person with real worth! I look forward to your comments and learn from them. And speaking of learning from fellow posters, Lydia I wish you would write a book. I would buy it in hardback!
And Julie Anne, thank you so much for this site. I feel safe and comfortable here.
LikeLike
“Waitingforthetrumpet, you betcha you are a real person with real worth! I look forward to your comments and learn from them. And speaking of learning from fellow posters, ”
Thank you so much, Marsha. All I’ve ever wanted, my whole life, was to be validated, loved and to be treated with the same respect that they expect from me. Instead, all I got was abuse.
LikeLike
Anon by Choice,
It seems to me that orthodoxy happens when mere men, on the basis of authority they do not possess, declare that their interpretations of Scripture are not to be questioned. The understanding of Scripture ends up being subjected to the test of mere human authority, and woe be to whoever dares question these men-as-authorities-standing-in-the-place-of-God. So much of what has been proclaimed as incontestable simply does not stand up to the test of Scripture. It has gotten to the place that the more somebody screams it’s orthodox, it’s orthodox, the more I want to stand up and scream you lie!, you lie! But I have to be careful, just in case.
I am quite agree with the views you express concerning the value of orthodoxy.
LikeLike
Amos,
I’ll save you the trouble. According to dictionary.com flippant means “frivolously disrespectful, shallow, or lacking in seriousness; characterized by levity.” Now I’m confused. I can see why a thin skinned narcissist would interpret my comments as being flippant, but not Q. Sigh.
LikeLike
“lydiasellerofpurple, So then you agree with Gary W’s tactics?
Here is just a few examples of Gary W’s logical fallacy usage -”
Typical. Frame the issue for me. No thanks. Not biting today.
Come now, Q. You come here begging to be teased with your declarative statements, “roles” and “essence” of equality. Surely your tactics don’t work in your world, do they? if they do, scaaaary. The Art of Persuasion by John Calvin? And of course, you are not anonymous so it is easy to use them. (hee hee)
Logical fallacies? So you think Gary has been trying to persuade you using bad reasoning? Naw, he just dares to disagree with you and teases you. That is the real problem. The absolute worst reasoning I have ever seen is in the ESS and comp camps. Without the word, “roles”, you guys would have a real problem. I am hoping more folks take a second look at the word, “role” and see it for the empty rhetoric it is. I don’t play act at life.
LikeLike
“And speaking of learning from fellow posters, Lydia I wish you would write a book. I would buy it in hardback!”
That is the biggest compliment I have ever had!!! I know I have not bought a “hardback” in years unless it is some classic. I have gotten rid of many hardbacks I wish I had not bought! Thanks!
LikeLike
“I am quite agree with the views you express concerning the value of orthodoxy.”
Me too. My hackles go up when I see that word bandied about. Lots of blood and evil done in the name of Orthodoxy over the millennia. Ever notice how “orthodoxy” changes depending on the guru and the era?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Q, I am stealing your Q for
Q.E.D.
:o)
LikeLike
A. Amos Love, Where did you go?
A. Amos Love, Now look up the word flippant and you will know why I wont lighten up on Gary W.
As far as your questions go –
“I’ll ask you – A few simple questions…
In the Bible – How many of His Disciples called themself – pastor/leader?
How many of His Disciples had the “Title/Position” – pastor/leader?
How many of His Disciples were, Hired or Fired as a – pastor/leader?”
None, Peter did call himself an Elder.
“Are you a pastor/leader?
No.
Are you an elder/overseer?”
No.
“What “leadership position” do you hold in the
501 (c) 3, Non-profit, Tax $ Deductible, Religious $ Corporation,
That the IRS calls church?”
None.
Now let me ask you –
What current popular Christian figure/figures do you most agree with?
What Christian books if any would you recommend?
Do you attend church and if so which one/ones?
LikeLike
Q, I am stealing your Q for
Q.E.D.
:o)
Are you a thief?
: )
No, let me ask you the same I did A. Amos Love, these reveal more than some other questions.
What current popular Christian figure/figures do you most agree with?
What Christian books if any would you recommend?
Do you attend church and if so which one/ones?
LikeLike
“No, let me ask you the same I did A. Amos Love, these reveal more than some other questions.
What current popular Christian figure/figures do you most agree with?
What Christian books if any would you recommend?
Do you attend church and if so which one/ones?”
I’m not Amos or Lydia, but I’ll answer your questions.
“What current popular Christian figure/figures do you most agree with?”
Jesus! He’s alive!!!
“What Christian books if any would you recommend?”
The Bible (Old and New Testaments) plus any good Hebrew and Greek translations for words I’m unclear about.
“Do you attend church and if so which one/ones?”
I can’t. I’m disabled and homebound, so I stay at home and study my Bible on my own, plus read extensively online everything I can get my hands/eyes on.
LikeLike
Well, well, Amos. It turns out that, though Q won’t tell me if s/he is male or female, you had better respond to her/his own string of questions post haste–or else he’ll get impatient and post the whole shebang all over again, exactly 1 hour and 5 minutes later.
I’ve learned something new. The letter Q is for petulant.
Given his demonstrated petulance, I’ll bet that when it comes to disciplining children, Q demands obedience to every parental demand, first time, every time, no questions allowed.
LikeLike
waitingforthetrumpet2,
How about someone besides Jesus and books on Christianity other than the bible?
Oh and what online reads/sites would you recommend to help me understand the bible better?
LikeLike
“No, let me ask you the same I did A. Amos Love, these reveal more than some other questions.”
What do these questions “reveal”? Your view of what is Orthodoxy? Or whether we can be inducted into your hall of fame on what it means to follow Christ?
“What current popular Christian figure/figures do you most agree with?”
Waitingforthetrumpet beat me to it. I have to say Jesus Christ because He is ALIVE which means He is current. :o). However, it is not about “agreement” in my view. It is about HOW HE LIVED in addition to the Cross/Resurrection.
Sorry to disappoint but I am not big into “Christian figures” who are mainly gurus making bank off Jesus. If you put a gun to my head and said they have to be mere mortals, I would say my late mom who LIVED out the truth of the kingdom now. There was also a janitor from my high school days who lived out the kingdom now and influenced many young people. He made not one penny off being a believer. Nor did he achieve a following. He just LIVED it.
“What Christian books if any would you recommend?”
Besides the Scriptures, I would recommend books about history whether written by believers or not. Most of history up to the last 300 years is also “church” history because most of history AD is state/church… including most of the wars leading up to 18th Century. Killing for Jesus. Starting with Augustine wanting to wipe out the Donatists. sigh. Read everything you can on history. Not just the approved list from the Mongeristic folks.
The much revered “Reformation” was political. Not spiritual. If it were “spiritual” they would not have also drowned, tortured and imprisoned Ana Baptists and others who disagreed with them. Luther would not have gone along with wiping out the peasants and Jews. Calvin would not have punished people for falling asleep during his sermon. They ended up competing with Rome on cruelty, tyranny and evil! I would recommend reading the Greco/Roman Household codes and ANE creation narratives. Get educated on the audience scriptures were written to. Makes a huge difference. History of the Jews by Paul Johnson is another great book. Pack a lunch and Eat your Wheaties.
“Do you attend church and if so which one/ones?”
Define “church”. Are you speaking of the assembling of the “called out” ones as in ecclesia? Or an institution with a specific corporate tax structure that is aligned with some denomination/movement where we go sit in pews facing forward to listen to an orator week after week? The answer is I assemble with other believers. Often.
LikeLike
“I can’t. I’m disabled and homebound, so I stay at home and study my Bible on my own, plus read extensively online everything I can get my hands/eyes on.”
I did not know that. God bless you!
LikeLiked by 1 person
https://archive.org/stream/interlinearliter00newy#page/n15/mode/2up
LikeLike
http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Hebrew_Index.htm
LikeLike
Someone OTHER than Jesus? Who would qualify more, and who would I rather emulate more than Jesus?
LikeLike
Gary W your assumption aren’t even close, Why all the character assassination?
Someone said you were teasing, or maybe its bullying. You relayed you are old enough to know better.
Ask a question without being flippant and using logical fallacies and character assassination, and I’ll answer.
LikeLike
WFTT2 ““What current popular Christian figure/figures do you most agree with?”Jesus! He’s alive!!!”
Current, but not always popular!
LikeLike
waitingforthetrumpet2, the reason I ask is because it reveals your beliefs and doctrine.
Do you get this independently without outside help?
LikeLike
Oooooh! Q will answer a simple question once I submit to his/her preconditions! All the while getting petulant if his/her own questions are not immediately answered!
Q is for qontrol freak.
LikeLike
Q, Your turn. Answer the same questions. please.
LikeLike
“WFTT2 ““What current popular Christian figure/figures do you most agree with?”Jesus! He’s alive!!!”
Current, but not always popular!”
:o)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Q asks, “Do you get this independently without outside help?”
Q is for Qondescension.
Yes Q, I am familiar with WFTT2’s testimony, and she is the real deal.
LikeLike
“Oooooh! Q will answer a simple question once I submit to his/her preconditions! All the while getting petulant if his/her own questions are not immediately answered!”
You are being “disciplined” as in “shunned”. (wink)
LikeLike
Q, I am for real. I make no apology for my life, my disabilities, my beliefs, my faith in Jesus’ death, burial, resurrection or my salvation.
I was brought up in the Southern Baptist faith. I went to college at a Baptist University graduating with a BA in English and another BA in Sociology. I then went into the military for 10 years, while studying for an MA in a related Sociological field.
Once I left the military, I started working for the Post Office for 13 years, until I had a grand mal on the workroom floor. I was then diagnosed with an inoperable tumor in my brainstem which causes seizures….hence one of my disabilities…I am not permitted to operate motor vehicles, nor is there any bus ministry at the church I wish to attend.
I am a survivor of lifelong abuse, hence why I frequent forums pertaining to abuse. Any other nosy, personal questions you wish to ask?
LikeLike
Gary W, it takes common decency to have real conversation, you have given me no reason to trust your judgement on someone, should i list all the assumptions and character assassinations you have made about me, if you can’t restrain yourself, why should I try to converse with you?
lydiasellerofpurple, i perused what you had wrote to my questions and think I agree with much but i am leaving. I will read it when I get back.and reply.
I am going to the gym…i do not want anyone to misconstrue me asking questions and then not sticking around for the answers or replying.
LikeLike
“You are being “disciplined” as in “shunned”. (wink)”
Yes, and maybe when Q accuses me of bullying s/he doesn’t recognize s/he is projecting onto me his/her own characterological tendencies, in which case s/he, like all bullies, is unable to take even the slightest modicum of heat–and so s/he is avoiding me.
Which, seriously, makes me wonder. When churches like Julie Anne’s old “church” practice shunning, is it really maybe just a face saving, blame shifting strategy for avoiding people they find threatening?
LikeLike
Q, I understand. I am going to “church” in a minute, too. :o) Well, an “assembling of believers”.
And Gary has common decency in spades. You came here full of condescension and arrogance. It could be that is how it works in your movement so you don’t see it. I know, cos I live around it at ground zero where “popular Christians leaders” come to amass young followers.
LikeLike
“Which, seriously, makes me wonder. When churches like Julie Anne’s old “church” practice shunning, is it really maybe just a face saving, blame shifting strategy for avoiding people they find threatening?”
Absolutely! How else can you shut them down? You certainly cannot engage them.
LikeLike
waiting4dtrumpet2: You are my sister, not only in faith but in experience and situation, and if you lived at my house, you’d get a huge hug twice a day.
LikeLike
Thank you so much, Patrice! I feel like crying now. I really could use that hug. I get so angry and upset sometimes.
LikeLike
waitingforthetrumpet2, when i posted my last comment I saw yours…I was only asking to see where people are coming from because I do not believe just because of what I posted it should cause such backlash.
Holding my beliefs do not cause people to be abusive, in fact it should cause the opposite.
I am strongly oppose to authoritarianism and those who practice such, many churches are practicing some sort it.
I sent JA a teaching on reformed theology (which I am strongly opposed to) written by a woman i find intelligent, having good understanding on the subject and credible and I am thankful for her teaching and use it as a resource, I say this to shine some light because many on here do not really know what I believe about men, women or doctrine but have made assumptions.
I do believe in the Trinity and the church is supposed to be governed by elders which are men, most men i see in the churches do not qualify, but have their own agendas.
I am sorry for your condition, i was not asking those physical personal questions.
I am leaving, I’ll check back later.
LikeLike
Q,
The backlash you received may possibly be because of your choice of words promoting heirarchical rule in the church and the home. Those are triggers for people who have been abused by these beliefs.
LikeLike
That’s a good point, WFTT2.
LikeLike