What the Charismatics have to deal with.

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I have seen good women ministers backed up with miracles, for me there is no doubt they can be ministers.

I think that good exegesis of Scripture takes into account what is being said, who said, why it was said, and how the readers understood it in terms of the culture they lived in.

We know that in first century Jewish culture, women took a subservient place to men, and so the instruction to the Corinthians that women keep silence in church was to stop disruption caused by wives questioning the prophecies, teaching, revelation, and tongues interpretation that were given in the meetings. Paul was dealing with a particular issue that was getting out of control in the Corinthian church. He didn't have to repeat the instruction to the other churches because there were no problems in those churches.

Paul's instruction to Timothy about women not teaching or usurping authority over men was to deal with women prophets in the Ephesian churches getting too big for their britches. Also in the culture of the time, women teachers and preachers were not welcomed, just like in some countries of our time, women are kept well in second place to men. Paul was a man of his time and culture. He was never aware that he was writing what was to turn out as Holy Scripture. What he told Timothy was mere in step with the culture and to curb the inappropriate conduct of some women in the Ephesian churches. But I don't believe that Paul's instruction concerning women was meant to be transcultural. Anyway Paul could not have foreseen the significant changes in modern western culture that brings women into equality with men, allowing women to have a great role in modern society. This is why I have no problem with women preachers and teachers.

In today's Western culture, Paul's instruction may be relevant if there is the same issue of anyone, man or woman, trying to take the prominent role in a church without the general agreement of the members. But properly ordained female pastors and teachers are quite appropriate for today's churches. In fact, many churches would have to close their doors if we didn't have them. For the same reasons, I have no problem with female elders, the same conditions applying to them as stated in 1 Timothy and Titus, except that a woman needs to have one husband.

 

[NBB]

I think that good exegesis of Scripture takes into account what is being said, who said, why it was said, and how the readers understood it in terms of the culture they lived in.

We know that in first century Jewish culture, women took a subservient place to men, and so the instruction to the Corinthians that women keep silence in church was to stop disruption caused by wives questioning the prophecies, teaching, revelation, and tongues interpretation that were given in the meetings. Paul was dealing with a particular issue that was getting out of control in the Corinthian church. He didn't have to repeat the instruction to the other churches because there were no problems in those churches.

Paul's instruction to Timothy about women not teaching or usurping authority over men was to deal with women prophets in the Ephesian churches getting too big for their britches. Also in the culture of the time, women teachers and preachers were not welcomed, just like in some countries of our time, women are kept well in second place to men. Paul was a man of his time and culture. He was never aware that he was writing what was to turn out as Holy Scripture. What he told Timothy was mere in step with the culture and to curb the inappropriate conduct of some women in the Ephesian churches. But I don't believe that Paul's instruction concerning women was meant to be transcultural. Anyway Paul could not have foreseen the significant changes in modern western culture that brings women into equality with men, allowing women to have a great role in modern society. This is why I have no problem with women preachers and teachers.

In today's Western culture, Paul's instruction may be relevant if there is the same issue of anyone, man or woman, trying to take the prominent role in a church without the general agreement of the members. But properly ordained female pastors and teachers are quite appropriate for today's churches. In fact, many churches would have to close their doors if we didn't have them. For the same reasons, I have no problem with female elders, the same conditions applying to them as stated in 1 Timothy and Titus, except that a woman needs to have one husband.

I believe they can be apostles, and prophets too.

 

[jiminpa]

For the most part Charismatics who are faithful and true disciples, are a threat to the kingdom of darkness. Every time the world, and even Christians see a negative or fake thing, ( especially covetous ministry) it brings reproach, name calling, and disinterest and a happy devil. There are conservative full bible believing Holy Spirit filled soldiers for the kingdom of God who understand the world will hate them and their Christ. Yet still they continue to be a hope and love to all mankind as well as prayer warriors. Their revival is not just coming--it is here always through Jesus.

Then there is the death of a thousand cuts that we have to face, even on our own forum, by people who claim to believe in the gifts, yet have no end of criticism for anything that the Holy Spirit does.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Then there is the death of a thousand cuts that we have to face, even on our own forum, by people who claim to believe in the gifts, yet have no end of criticism for anything that the Holy Spirit does.

Rejoice and be glad.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Then there is the death of a thousand cuts that we have to face, even on our own forum, by people who claim to believe in the gifts, yet have no end of criticism for anything that the Holy Spirit does.

The whole mission of the Holy Spirit is to glorify Christ and assist us to fulfill the Great Commission to share the Gospel over the whole world. Anything attributed to the Holy Spirit that is outside of that is just human speculation and pretense. The Holy Spirit does not glorify the creature above the Creator. Therefore anyone advertised as "God's man of faith and power" is not God's man at all, and the claim of faith and power is false. Anyone who sets himself up as spiritually superior and appears to have a special ear to God that none of us in the common herd has, is not of the Holy Spirit at all. The most likely people to be working in the power of the Holy Spirit would be the little old grannies with hair in a bun and tennis shoes, in the church basement, praying for revival.

 

[ARBITER01]

The whole mission of the Holy Spirit is to glorify Christ and assist us to fulfill the Great Commission to share the Gospel over the whole world. Anything attributed to the Holy Spirit that is outside of that is just human speculation and pretense.

Incorrect.

We are to do the will of GOD, and for each of us, that is different. We are not all preachers only worried about souls Oscarr.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Incorrect.

We are to do the will of GOD, and for each of us, that is different. We are not all preachers only worried about souls Oscarr.

The reality is that the five fold ministries are to bring the whole body of Christ into the unity of the faith. This is God's will - one Lord, one faith, and one baptism. Anyone can call themselves an apostle or prophet, but if they are doing it just for their own denomination, ignoring others, then they are not the five fold ministries that are specified by Paul. This is why the NAR are not true apostles or prophets according to the five fold ministries, because they are working just for their own select branch of the body of Christ. Their ministries may have limited benefit for their own members, just as I work within my own Union church with its six elderly ladies. So, I am not a true pastor or teacher according to the five fold ministries, because I am not working in a transdenominational capacity.

 

[jiminpa]

The reality is that the five fold ministries are to bring the whole body of Christ into the unity of the faith. This is God's will - one Lord, one faith, and one baptism. Anyone can call themselves an apostle or prophet, but if they are doing it just for their own denomination, ignoring others, then they are not the five fold ministries that are specified by Paul. This is why the NAR are not true apostles or prophets according to the five fold ministries, because they are working just for their own select branch of the body of Christ. Their ministries may have limited benefit for their own members, just as I work within my own Union church with its six elderly ladies. So, I am not a true pastor or teacher according to the five fold ministries, because I am not working in a transdenominational capacity.

Case in point.

 

[jiminpa]

The reality is that the five fold ministries are to bring the whole body of Christ into the unity of the faith. This is God's will - one Lord, one faith, and one baptism. Anyone can call themselves an apostle or prophet, but if they are doing it just for their own denomination, ignoring others, then they are not the five fold ministries that are specified by Paul. This is why the NAR are not true apostles or prophets according to the five fold ministries, because they are working just for their own select branch of the body of Christ. Their ministries may have limited benefit for their own members, just as I work within my own Union church with its six elderly ladies. So, I am not a true pastor or teacher according to the five fold ministries, because I am not working in a transdenominational capacity.

That's exactly not consistent with anything I have heard from anyone I know of associated with NAR. Also, it's not practical to individually minister to the entire body of Christ considering its scope.

If you look hard enough for flaws, you can find them in anything. If one is willing to lie, he can create perceived flaws in everything.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

That's exactly not consistent with anything I have heard from anyone I know of associated with NAR. Also, it's not practical to individually minister to the entire body of Christ considering its scope.

If you look hard enough for flaws, you can find them in anything. If one is willing to lie, he can create perceived flaws in everything.

Although many in the first century churches who operated in the five fold ministries were not able to work with all the churches in the known world, they were universally recognised by all the churches that were remaining faithful to Christ and Him crucified as their foundation doctrine.

The situation today is a very divided church and although a ministry is recognised within one movement, or a selected cluster of denominations, it is not universally recognised in the way that the first century ministries were. Seeing that it was and is compulsory for the five fold ministries to be universally effective for bringing the church into unity of the faith, there as to be a reasonable doubt that the modern version is going to accurately reflect what Paul was teaching about it.

 

[jiminpa]

Although many in the first century churches who operated in the five fold ministries were not able to work with all the churches in the known world, they were universally recognised by all the churches that were remaining faithful to Christ and Him crucified as their foundation doctrine.

The situation today is a very divided church and although a ministry is recognised within one movement, or a selected cluster of denominations, it is not universally recognised in the way that the first century ministries were. Seeing that it was and is compulsory for the five fold ministries to be universally effective for bringing the church into unity of the faith, there as to be a reasonable doubt that the modern version is going to accurately reflect what Paul was teaching about it.

Well, that statement is something other than biblical. Your posts are consistent.

So you're taking the position that because the church is divided the Biblical offices are invalid? Wouldn't that fall on the unbiblical cessationists and semi-cessationists for not believing the Bible, and being the divisive ones? But no, we have to hold the ones following the Bible accountable for the unbelief of the contemporary Pharisees.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

I have seen good women ministers backed up with miracles, for me there is no doubt they can be ministers.

I'm a bit late to this party, but I do not find scripture that supports women being in leadership positions in a fellowship. God set an order in His creation (1 Corinthians 11:3), God over Christ, Christ over many, man over woman.

In Ephesians 5:22-24 the Holy Spirit says that women are to submit to their husbands in everything. This is why the Holy Spirit inspired Paul to write in 1 Timothy 2:12-13 that women are not to teach or have authority over a man, because Adam was first formed then Eve.

In Acts 1 when Peter stood up to select a replacement for Judas, he didnt even consider a woman for the position.

In Acts 15:23, the letter from the Jerusalem Council starts, "The Apostles and the Elders, your Brothers...". Not brothers and sisters.

Now women can still be prophets, deacons and evangelists, because those are not leadership positions, but leadership positions in a fellowship are to be reserved for men. At very least, leadership over men. Women can lead other women and children, even teach them.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

I think that good exegesis of Scripture takes into account what is being said, who said, why it was said, and how the readers understood it in terms of the culture they lived in.

We know that in first century Jewish culture, women took a subservient place to men, and so the instruction to the Corinthians that women keep silence in church was to stop disruption caused by wives questioning the prophecies, teaching, revelation, and tongues interpretation that were given in the meetings. Paul was dealing with a particular issue that was getting out of control in the Corinthian church. He didn't have to repeat the instruction to the other churches because there were no problems in those churches.

Paul's instruction to Timothy about women not teaching or usurping authority over men was to deal with women prophets in the Ephesian churches getting too big for their britches. Also in the culture of the time, women teachers and preachers were not welcomed, just like in some countries of our time, women are kept well in second place to men. Paul was a man of his time and culture. He was never aware that he was writing what was to turn out as Holy Scripture. What he told Timothy was mere in step with the culture and to curb the inappropriate conduct of some women in the Ephesian churches. But I don't believe that Paul's instruction concerning women was meant to be transcultural. Anyway Paul could not have foreseen the significant changes in modern western culture that brings women into equality with men, allowing women to have a great role in modern society. This is why I have no problem with women preachers and teachers.

In today's Western culture, Paul's instruction may be relevant if there is the same issue of anyone, man or woman, trying to take the prominent role in a church without the general agreement of the members. But properly ordained female pastors and teachers are quite appropriate for today's churches. In fact, many churches would have to close their doors if we didn't have them. For the same reasons, I have no problem with female elders, the same conditions applying to them as stated in 1 Timothy and Titus, except that a woman needs to have one husband.

Implying that portions of scripture should be considered less authoritative because the author didn't know what they were writing would become scripture is awful, awful.

The Spirit knew and while we do need to bear in mind cultural differences when reading and studying scripture, what Paul wrote about women in church has no such restriction.

His argument to Timothy wasn't based on what the Ephesian cult of Artemis was doing, he said "Adam was first formed then Eve." That has application for all cultures, and it jives well with other scripture on the topic.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Well, that statement is something other than biblical. Your posts are consistent.

So you're taking the position that because the church is divided the Biblical offices are invalid? Wouldn't that fall on the unbiblical cessationists and semi-cessationists for not believing the Bible, and being the divisive ones? But no, we have to hold the ones following the Bible accountable for the unbelief of the contemporary Pharisees.

The way the early church developed with increasing heresies and divisions was anything but Biblical. In the end, a professionally trained clergy was deemed necessary to ensure that congregations got sound doctrine. Bishops took over the management of churches because the gifts of prophecy and tongues were being so misused, they were causing confusion and harm to the people. These are facts of church history. The state of our modern churches are certainly not consistent with Scripture. It is one thing to quote the references with a view to what we should do, but the actual practice is quite another thing, and most of what goes on is lip service. Think about it. How many listeners to sermons and messages actually go away and put them into practice? I would say that most of sermon content is forgotten by the time the people finish their cups of tea and coffee after the morning service.

All we have to do is to study what Jesus said to the seven churches to see clearly by around 80-90 AD, most churches were in trouble because they had strayed from the Biblical standard.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Implying that portions of scripture should be considered less authoritative because the author didn't know what they were writing would become scripture is awful, awful.

The Spirit knew and while we do need to bear in mind cultural differences when reading and studying scripture, what Paul wrote about women in church has no such restriction.

His argument to Timothy wasn't based on what the Ephesian cult of Artemis was doing, he said "Adam was first formed then Eve." That has application for all cultures, and it jives well with other scripture on the topic.

Given the state of our modern churches and how far away from the Biblical standard, the issue about women pastors and preachers is relatively minor. What should be addressed is how to deal with the man-programmed services, having one pastor controlling a whole church, spending mega bucks on buildings, and basic lip service in the form of preaching messages that very few remember, let alone put into practice. In essence our churches are totally controlled by man and not the Holy Spirit. What people think is the Holy Spirit is nothing more than froth and bubble.

So, I reckon we need to address the more important issues that are keeping the Holy Spirit from doing anything significant in our churches before we worry about whether women preachers are Biblical or not.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Given the state of our modern churches and how far away from the Biblical standard, the issue about women pastors and preachers is relatively minor. What should be addressed is how to deal with the man-programmed services, having one pastor controlling a whole church, spending mega bucks on buildings, and basic lip service in the form of preaching messages that very few remember, let alone put into practice. In essence our churches are totally controlled by man and not the Holy Spirit. What people think is the Holy Spirit is nothing more than froth and bubble.

So, I reckon we need to address the more important issues that are keeping the Holy Spirit from doing anything significant in our churches before we worry about whether women preachers are Biblical or not.

I wouldn't argue with you about the state of the modern church. I'd actually agree.

I also need to apologize. My remarks may have sounded a bit harsh and I repent of that. I need to work on speaking with salt and grace, not poison and sword.

Now to the matter of leadership, I disagree of course. There are few things more important than godly leadership. I have a hard time seeing how someone whom God wouldn't have called, can be a "successful" minister.

Paul kinda dealt with this issue in 2 Corinthians and the "super Apostles". People who threw titles on themselves. Titles that God didn't give them, and they were causing confusion and discord. As such, if God said, "Leadership in the church is meant solely for men." Then we should heed that.

Poor state of the church notwithstanding, truth is truth and we can't set aside one aspect of truth because it's inconvenient, offense to some, or not as important as something else.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I wouldn't argue with you about the state of the modern church. I'd actually agree.

I also need to apologize. My remarks may have sounded a bit harsh and I repent of that. I need to work on speaking with salt and grace, not poison and sword.

Now to the matter of leadership, I disagree of course. There are few things more important than godly leadership. I have a hard time seeing how someone whom God wouldn't have called, can be a "successful" minister.

Paul kinda dealt with this issue in 2 Corinthians and the "super Apostles". People who threw titles on themselves. Titles that God didn't give them, and they were causing confusion and discord. As such, if God said, "Leadership in the church is meant solely for men." Then we should heed that.

Poor state of the church notwithstanding, truth is truth and we can't set aside one aspect of truth because it's inconvenient, offense to some, or not as important as something else.

I don't see you as abrasive at all. You are just a good debater who calls a spade and spade and doesn't compromise.

Pastors and teachers are just as important as apostles and prophets, and they are essential for successful ministry in local churches. In the early church which was made up of several home groups in an area, the pastor and teacher would itinerate from one to the other. We need to remember that the larger "church" meeting in a purpose built premises did not come about until the 4th Century when Christianity became accepted and persecution stopped. Before then, if a large group met publicly, they would be shut down pretty quickly and the members imprisoned or killed. Today's comparison would be an underground church in a Muslim country. So, it is obvious that there wouldn't be mass evangelistic and healing meetings, because it would have been suicide to have them. But once the church adopted purpose built, architectural style buildings, then there needed to be an organisation to maintain them, and stronger leadership to cater for the increased number of believers and "nominal" religious people (mainly pagan on the inside). So in the early church, pre 4th Century, there weren't loud, rowdy meetings like as seen in Chuck Piece's Zion church.

What I am saying is that the early church was a totally different type of church with home meetings of not more than around 20 people, and because there was a much higher price to pay being a Christian, the power of the Holy Spirit would be much more present. One had to be totally committed and prepared to die for their faith, which many actually did. This is quite different to many modern Christians who treat the faith as a hobby and therefore are a lot more light hearted about it.

 

[jiminpa]

Given the state of our modern churches and how far away from the Biblical standard, the issue about women pastors and preachers is relatively minor. What should be addressed is how to deal with the man-programmed services, having one pastor controlling a whole church, spending mega bucks on buildings, and basic lip service in the form of preaching messages that very few remember, let alone put into practice. In essence our churches are totally controlled by man and not the Holy Spirit. What people think is the Holy Spirit is nothing more than froth and bubble.

So, I reckon we need to address the more important issues that are keeping the Holy Spirit from doing anything significant in our churches before we worry about whether women preachers are Biblical or not.

Wow! That's ironic, since the thing that limits the Holy Spirit the most is unbelief, which someone whose posts do nothing but question every move of the Spirit sows. Maybe, if we quit listening sowers of doubt so much, we wouldn't need so much man-made programming and bad doctrine in place of Spirit direction.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Wow! That's ironic, since the thing that limits the Holy Spirit the most is unbelief, which someone whose posts do nothing but question every move of the Spirit sows. Maybe, if we quit listening sowers of doubt so much, we wouldn't need so much man-made programming and bad doctrine in place of Spirit direction.

So, what do you think is the evidence that the Holy Spirit is active and moving in a situation? Just askin'.

 

[jiminpa]

We could go with what we see in the Bible. The sick healed, the captives set free, hearts turned to God, The Good News proclaimed, prophecy, people dedicating themselves to prayer and the word of God. I'm sure I'm missing a few things.