Jump to content

Witness

IS IT PROPER FOR A WOMAN TO SPEAK, TEACH AND PROPHESY?

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

Witness -
Space Merchant -
62
1404

Top Posters


Recommended Posts

On 8/21/2018 at 10:43 PM, Space Merchant said:

you clearly showing yourself to be very open to the ideology and Christology of New Age Christians

No, no, no.  It’s not “New Age”, but “new wine” in “new wineskins”.

As long as your “skin” hold onto bits and pieces of the old law covenant; such as anointed women unable to be leaders, what will happen?

“the skins will burst; the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. No, they pour new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved.”  Matt 9:17

“Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.”

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 8/24/2018 at 11:14 PM, Witness said:

No, no, no.  It’s not “New Age”, but “new wine” in “new wineskins”.

Not "New Age" you say? Did you not just say the following?

On 8/20/2018 at 1:07 PM, Witness said:

I have never directed my attention to the earthly Jerusalem.  The Bride is the new creation of heavenly Jerusalem.  They are both human and “angel”.    

Humans and Angels are both separate Creations, they are not the same and or equal to each other (that is like saying an animal is both dog and fish), furthermore, as I told the Trinitarian, Humans are NOT Spirits nor do said human transferred elsewhere upon death. In the case of the ones chosen for Priesthood, they will have new bodies, they do not become human and angel hybrids or disembodied souls that roam the Heavens, the only people who believe such things are New Age Christians, of which I had dealt with for half a decade even in person, as is with others. To make matters worse, they have a connection to the ones of Babylon, L.T. of whom had made it their conquest to change Christianity since the 1920s by means of their Spiritual Mother and their connection to Helena Blavatsky and Carl Jung, furthermore, New Agers not only believe in human angel hybrids, they also believe that they can and or professed the ability to communicate with angels, demons, and spirits.

So when you speak of those of Priesthood,

  • [1] Do not mix verses to speak of what you just uttered, which is the things of New Age ideologies, and

 

  • [2] You should know by now that such ones do not become like human and angel, as you claim, the Bible even tells you, clearly, that those destined for Priesthood will have New Spiritual Bodies, for these people are totally separate from Angels, nothing you have can show anyone that such ones become both human and angel when the reality and the very facts even tells you - even the title and the outline in the Bible itself tells you this, the ones destined from Priesthood will have Spiritual Bodies, never is it stated they are like the angels or become hybrids, similar to them when the Bible tells you the distinction.

Therefore, what you have said is of New Age ideology, everyone knows who the New Age Christians are among mainstream denominations, it is not unknown to anyone of who they are, their practices, does it follow the church or not and or other, and we know them very, very well becomes the biggest heresy of their Christology is having the ability and or belief of communicating with angels, demons, and spirits, for they too believe in the heresy that is the Afterlife, for they too believe that those among them become both human and angel, and so forth.

It is a shame you do not see that for yourself, even going as far as to mix Bible verses together that do not even match up, one of which even defeats your own claim – if you are to teach, you can end up as those who mislead, at least do the study and research and understand the Bible to not be in the position that you are in now and actually understand not just who the anointed are among men and women, but what will become of them afterwards, to say human and angel is not only disturbing, but shows how you are not as strong in this domain a you think, so further research is needed, on your part.

Because you keep missing it the first time, re-read your verses before you make such a response, again, the verses you mixed together can easily be read and one can see of what such verses actually points to

As for the verses in question:

On 8/20/2018 at 1:07 PM, Witness said:

 1 Pet 1:23; 2 Cor 5:27;1 Cor 15:44; Heb 8:5; 1 Cor 3:16; Ezek 41:18,19   

The older response (better to just go to the link itself:

Quote

Again, already known, this verse, 2 Corinthians 5:17 also connects with Galatians 6:15, which in itself, points straight to Ephsians 2:10 regarding the New Creation, for those who are one in Christ are part of what the Temple brings forth, the New Heavens and Earth, as all cross-references point to if read for context, hence why it is spoken of as Jesus being the Beginning and End (Into the New Covenant) in regards to the New Creation, at times in parallel to Melchizedek to some scholars.

And like I said no, humans are not like angels and or become human/angel hybrid of any form for they are TWO different creations, therefore it is silly to spout the talk of New Age nonsense, now for Humans, the Bible speaks of them taking a Spiritual Body, or as the Biblical Title and Outline states, A New Body.

1 Corinthians 3:16 would not make sense to use here because it speaks of us being of God’s Temple and like what was stated in Ephesians, God dwells in us just as he dwells in the Christ, nothing pertaining to being both human and angel hybrids.

Therefore, read the actual references for this verse for context before making such a response: Romans 6:16, 8:9, 1 Corinthians 3:9, 17, 6:19, 2 Corinthians 6:16, 1 Peter 2:5, Ephesians 2:21, 22, 1 Timothy 3:15 and Hebrews 3:6.

If anything at minimum, at least take the very words of Peter and follow the references through for context, furthermore, being in union with Christ and or anything pertaining to the Spiritual House, especially the people, those of Priesthood and those who will gain Eternal Life, as stated to you before, should be very obvious.

Ezekiel 41:18-19 makes no mention of a man becoming an angel and or any type of human/angel hybrids. Another factor here is the very cross-references of this verse (1 Kings 6:29, 7:36, 2 Chronicles 3:7), makes no connection and or match-up with what you have stated, at least be a Witness to what the Bible says rather than going about your own understanding or the ideologies of the New Aged Ones.

[18] It was carved of cherubim and palm trees, a palm tree between cherub and cherub. Every cherub had two faces: [19] a human face toward the palm tree on the one side, and the face of a young lion toward the palm tree on the other side. They were carved on the whole temple all around.

So it can be asked, what did you try to prove here by making mention of this verse? Unless you do not understand what these verses been and it's context? Anyone who is honest can read, research, identify and understand of what this very conveys, simply in an obvious connection to the Temple, as seen in Prophet Ezekiel's Vision: The Inner Temple, or as read in the outlines, The Interior of the Sanctuary.

1 Corinthians 15:44 speaks of Spiritual Bodies

[44] It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.

Be it of the any spiritual means  or that of the earth, a person, be it, regardless of their sex, have a body, for all persons. Once again to become a whole person, one who has died being raised up, having a body, hence the verse in question. We are humans, not angels, and angels are not humans, nor can there be of and or spoken of any hybrids of any form for we are separate creations.

Going on to 2 Corinthians 5, well in short, does not make up with what you have said

Therefore, you have to be very careful with verses and passages, otherwise, like I said, you'll trip over yourself - for this isn't the first time you have done this.

I recommend Biblehub (https://biblehub.com/) if you are truly having issues with context and references.

Now,  Wineskins are skin like bottle made of the complete hides of domestic animal, for instance, goats or perhaps sheep, and it is used for holding wine, in some other occasions, water and or some other liquid. Wine was put into new wineskins, and the reason for this is because as it ferments, it begins to generate carbon dioxide gas that results into pressure on the skin bottles. New skins expand; old, inflexible ones burst under the pressure, we can see the usage in verses such as the one you have mentioned (Matthew 9:17), as well as Joshua 9:4. Wineskins can be stretched out due to their elasticity, but over time it can lose it. In Biblical Times it is also used, for wine of course, as seen in 1 Samuels 16:20. Wineskins can also lose its durability over time, hence the loss of elasticity.

I know this because at the age of 9, we, my people, used domesticated goats for wineskins, other times, to carry other forms of liquid such as water and or in some cases, milk. We had the skins in house and we were able to craft the Bottle with the necessary tools needed to do so, something of which is still being done today since there are literally goats everyone on that island, the hills, the roads, near the beaches.

On 8/24/2018 at 11:14 PM, Witness said:

As long as your “skin” hold onto bits and pieces of the old law covenant; such as anointed women unable to be leaders, what will happen?

And yet the this one who says that what Paul says was that of an opinion when what he had spoken of was actually creation in regards to the mention of Adam and Eve, when addressing the church, as well as addressing the family – the Holy Spirit does not enable an Apostle to give opinions mainly in regards to where you make mention of such regarding Paul, it enables him to speak of what God’s Word is all about, hence all that is said must be taken into full respects, not picking and choosing favorites and adding to the Word. Then again, you did say he had the Holy Spirit, and before that you make it seem as though Paul didn't mean what he had said regarding a specific verse.

My “skin” is only holding on to everything and everything in relation to the bible, and everything that comes from the Bible is truth, a truth you seem to not believe when the very facts are as clear as the sky against you and holds more water than what you and Srecko in say in combination, revealing the both of you yielding upon, as I said before, man’s understanding of the Bible rather than of God and or any of his followers, even his Son, a very long time ago.

What do you think, Witness? Name one anointed woman of the Priesthood, in the Bible (Greek New Testament), who has led and or taken up authority/or of religious office of a or perhaps ANY of the early church(es) when she, who is anointed/chosen is very, very well aware, Holy as can be, of God’s Purpose, God’s Will, God’s Grace, God’s Justice, God’s Promise and God’s Order? (Do not make a dubious claim as Srecko did, for you tend to agree with him, not knowing of what he said of Abraham which is in connection with the Promised Seed, hence Galatians even as far to say the following below) :

On 8/11/2018 at 3:36 AM, Srecko Sostar said:

Chloe is woman, sister of the Corinth congregation, obviously in position of leading the church. And she has important contacts with Paul and with handling things in cong. 

Just opinion, as always :)) Nothing that must be established by the Law of the Media and Persia.

You agree with the very man who seems to be a yes-man to you and you to him?

He makes this as a strong statement coupled with opinion that hold no water whatsoever, just as his confusion with Deborah and Barak, and his mention of Jael when months ago he was against Jael's actions and her being seen as a hero, therefore, he is spinning his wheels here, as we can see Srecko trying to allude to the church by using a judge and a native who had a common enemy, when we see for ourselves nothing about churches is seen in this passage, even Srecko's own information defeats his own claims, therefore, I agree with Gone Away, Srecko, many times mentions can and or seen as flawed, as well as cryptic.

The truth of the matter, a truth that is being professes to the both of you is that the Bible makes mention of her one time and were actions was that of a peacemaker and not a church leader, nor did Chloe/and or House of Chloe lead the Church of Corinth, the Bible makes no mention of what Srecko is saying.

And Srecko has been corrected not too long ago alongside a few other points (mind the typos, since before you like to use such against me only for such to backfire in the end) :

Quote

No, Chloe is not a religious leader in Corinth, the fact you even said that makes shows that what you just said is hypocrisy, an actual lie for that matter that is perhaps greater than your other ones, granted the very weight of the evidence is as big as the Sun compared to your claim that is very disturbing. No one has ever in their lifetime and or practice would even consider such of what you have address just now and that my friend, is sickening and a showy remark of someone who clearly does not understand his Bible.

To be very brief, Chloe was living among her household and had only contacted Paul via letter to inform him of what the Church of Corinth is doing, again, chaos, if it got a woman such as her to write, than you'd realize the problem, and it points to your contradiction, Sostar. We later find out that Paul discovers and goes about his way to handle the situation with success. Because Chloe and her household were vigilante and aware of the division and practices of that church and taking action, she was indeed a peace maker, granted in biblical historic accounts, she is known as a peace keeper just for this action alone to which she was only addressed once. Like I told you before, there are many women in the Bible who are indeed heroes.

Chloe is a woman through a household of which Apostle Paul received reports concerning the issues existing in the church of the Corinthians, hence the only verse of which the House of Chloe was even mentioned 1 Corinthians 1:11. Although Apostle Paul’s Epistle does not state, anywhere, that Chloe was a Christian living in Corinth or Ephesus, moreover, in view of the Apostle’s reference to this household by name (The House of Chloe), evidently at least some members of the home, either family members or slaves, were Christians known to the Corinthians.

Paul soon addresses quarreling within the church of the Corinthians and was enabled to do so due to Chloe’s people, her household, who had reported those quarrels to Paul. These reports were not rumors and or of gossip either, they were an attempt to get Paul’s help in resolving a problem within the church, hence the discovery by Paul of what was taking place. The source of the quarrel is revealed to be the people were divided as well as their issue with who should be in Pastoral Office. We can see the division when it is said by some that they:

  • I follow Paul
  • I follow Peter (or Cephas)
  • I follow Apollos
  • I follow Christ

Therefore, the Corinthians were segmenting themselves unnecessarily and wrongfully. We soon find out Apostle Paul's discovery led to a response, reminding them that Christ is not divided and that Jesus’ is the name under which all believers are saved and baptized, check out 1 Corinthians 1:12-16. He adds that the Christ had appointed him, Paul, to preach the good news of the gospel, but not with wisdom and eloquence, for the Christ be made powerless and or useless, empty of power.

In response to the concerns of Chloe’s household, Apostle Paul states that the Christ is the one who saves and that the power of the gospel is His power, see Romans 1:16. For Apostle Paul, Simon Peter, and Apollos were all preaching Christ’s message of the gospel. The believers should always follow Christ as the Shepherd, rather following men, whose eloquent words often create competition with one another and or those who clearly are not in application of Christ's message. Quarreling should not be among us who are baptized whom or what preacher is more gifted. Wisdom of a man is not the point of the gospel, but rather, the Christ’s work is what saves, is what redeems us, the people.

Chloe her household were aware enough to look and see for themselves the division occurring in the church. The actions of the Corinthians in their church, to put men who do not apply the teachings to be elevated above God and so they wrote to Apostle Paul asking for his help in order to resolve this matter. In seeking the assistance of the proper authority in the church (in their case, an Apostle, who just happens to be Paul).

That being said, Chloe was never a religious leader of any church, so do not make such a broken claim among claims. Chloe and her household were peacemakers, take a good look at Matthew 5:9 and understand what that means.

You clearly do not understand anything that was said and even show it, there is no issue with anointed women of the Priesthood or Being One with Christ, the only problem here is you making a strong and yet failing claim that women can be church leaders, I even asked both you and Srecko to show me a church found in the Old Testament, what the both of you have done was use Deborah, a Prophetess, a Judge of Israel as an example when we see that she was no head of the church (but Srecko took it a step further to put the title of Barak on to Deborah when we can see through the Bible and history of who Barak is and what his title actually is), the church didn’t even come into play until very later on, as seen in the New Testament - in the days of the Christ and beyond.

The practice of women leadership in the church was unfounded until centuries upon centuries later, something of which you and Srecko (the very person who makes claim Chloe was a church leader of Corinth; the very man you show total agreement with; the very man who sees Abraham as a selfish man yet he, Sostar having the audacity to quote Galatians 3 afterwards) fail to see because the both of you lack in not just the history of the Bible, as this was seen before, but the history of the church.

We see Paul’s own words him referencing Creation (even advanced bible readers can point this out to you) and all the Biblical Facts stated before are unshakable, just as God’s Order, but in regards to God himself, his Order cannot be changed and or broken, as according to Apostle Paul, anyone to practices something else, let him be accursed.

There is nothing in the Law that speak of women, any woman being a religious leader of authority within a church so why alluded to Law Covenant what you are trying to point to is unfounded? Granted we do not see anything regarding churches in the Old Testament. If you feel so bold about such, state it here, I can assure you that nothing of Paul and the Church shows women leadership of the church, they are shown to be ministers and teachers, having such roles to contribute to the works, but none of them led a church (but surely you may agree with Srecko when he himself cannot find any information and yields upon his own feelings and opinions), we also take into account the very students of the Apostles and later on, the Church Fathers, again, we do not see any woman leading a church, and the only reason we see such today is people went upon their opinions and feelings if a man can do something a woman can do it too, thus enabling something that was never in practice to begin with.

The only reason you believe the church can be lead by women as well is based on what others who study the Bible had said, it is because of the change of the times, and ones emotional opinion, or the mentality that men/women can do anything even when it comes to changes and addition to the Church, hence the adding of Traditions of Men into the Churches when the Bible speaks against it. You are in the clear to shed your emotion on such a matter, but trying to preach an accursed teaching as such only will put you in a spot to be corrected and if you had actually studied the Bible for once, you even see that for yourself.

The Bible, is it truth, but if it is not found in the Bible, you only show yourself to be one who is mislead, and yet when one speaks truth, you refuse it, therefore, you can be categorized as a mainstream Christians, if you yourself even cannot see that and with what you said before, you lean upon the teachings of the New Aged Ones, who are not too far off from today's common Trinitarian or Spiritualist.

I also pointed out even True Christian women can see that it is not their place to lead a church, as I said to either you or someone else, I came back from Africa, African Christians, even the ones I met in Asia, who know their Bible even understands the roles of both a man and a woman in the church, no one is better than the other, but together they help build themselves up as part of the Spiritual House, despite the roles being entirely different.

Read your Bible, do not make the call that Paul was stating an opinion when He, an Apostle, having the Holy Spirit being poured on to him, to wrote the church, visited the church, was in the ministry and preached the gospel, and was a slave to the Christ, as well as doing everything in his power to serve the God of the Christ. Everything he had said, it has to be applied into context and only then, you will see truth, of which you refuse to believe based on your emotional driven exegesis.

As for what will happen, Paul spoke of the accursed, and anyone who professes to the accursed and or teaches something entirely different from the truth, will be judged, and if guilty, will perish.

There is no middle ground here, you are either for God and continue to seek and or have the truth means life, the other option is if one seek God wrongly, teach something entirely different, this individual will be met with death, the bible makes it very clear, you can read this for yourself and clearly see there is no middle ground. You either dine with Jesus and break bread with him, learn of Jesus’ God and Father, or, on the other side of the spectrum, you go play cards with the Devil who deals the cards and be mislead out of what the Bible actually says – your call.

If I were you, I suggest Religious History and Theological Studies, for if you didn't know about the New Age stuff and their Christology, it would now be a good time to understand what such ones and or others profess so you yourself to not dwell upon your own confusion, because even a novice among Theologian can see this and will make a response to you.

On 8/24/2018 at 11:14 PM, Witness said:

“the skins will burst; the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. No, they pour new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved.”  Matt 9:17

Truth is love and at times people cannot handle the truth, and the truth is, women cannot be church leaders and or having authority within a church and or position of office in a church, regardless if a woman is anointed or not. Women can teach as ministers and the like, but never take up a role of church authority, of which reconciles with God’s Order, hence why Paul makes mention to Creation, even that of Adam and Eve.

Faithful are the wounds of a friend; profuse are the kisses of an enemy.

Also know the difference between the Law Covenant (of which Paul uses Hagar as symbolism) and the New Covenant (of which Paul uses Sarah as symbolism)

  • The mediator of the Law Covenant is Moses, for the Israelites feared talking to God and Moses was tasked to speak with God hence becoming the First Mediator in the Old Testament (Exodus 20:19), we also know that Apostle Paul spoke of the Laws of mediation as seen in Galatians 3:19. The Mediator of the New Covenant is Jesus, as seen in the New Testament, and Jesus is addressed as the mediator of God by Apostle Paul (1 Timothy 2:5, also see Hebrews 9:15, 12:24).

 

  • The parties involved, For The Law Covenant it was between God the Father and Natural Israel, but in the New Covenant it is between God the Father and Spiritual Israel.

  • The Law Covenant made use of Animal Sacrifices; however the New Covenant, Jesus sacrificed himself for mankind, in turn, upon death, enabled the New Covenant immediately.

  • The Law Covenant made use of written on stones tablets, while the New Covenant, the Law is written in our hearts, or the heart of men [humans/mankind].

  • For God had foretold that the Law Covenant would be overwritten by a New Covenant with benefits that are everlasting, and True Christians are under the New Covenant and know that the New Covenant consist of both Priesthood and heirs, both of whom, are bounded by it.

Therefore, one can understand what it means To be One in/In Union with the Christ, as well as having him and his God dwell in the individual, deemed a True Christian, be it man or woman, black or white, etc. they are of Abraham's Seed and of the Spiritual House. Regardless, we do not see anywhere that the New Covenant changes God's Order regarding The Church, or the Family.

On 8/24/2018 at 11:14 PM, Witness said:

“Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.”

If your neighbor speaks truth and you ignore it, how is it you deem yourself to express something of God's Likeness, that is, love?

While you go dwell on historical Biblical and Church knowledge - if you accept to do so on your own part, understand and research the Biblical Facts because you will need to learn and understand on both the Family and Church structure, do not be like those who have the mentality that a wife can be a husband and a husband can be a wife, or that is not of God's Order, just as those who try to change it up in the Church Structure, therefore, both you and Srecko have only shown yourself to dwell upon an emotional exegesis and opinions of your own, in this sense, understanding of men, in Srecko's case, I tend to be critical of him because he does not realize how much of the information he is twisting, example would be Deborah, he calls her a military leader of some sort, but the Bible says it is Barak.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites




×

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation