Space Merchant

@Srecko Sostar 

11 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

JW representatives are participants on regular basis (for many years) in OSCE meetings as Non-Governmental Organizations.

What  is  OSCE? https://www.osce.org/who-we-are

Among its key partner organizations are the United Nations, the European Union, the Council of Europe, and NATO. Perhaps this is continuation after 1991-2001 disgrace with UN affiliation. http://www.truebiblecode.com/images/JWUNDPI.pdf

YES, WT and JW are politically involved.

There is no Neutral position, perhaps only  as  OBLIGATION for members, most for rank and file members.

This has already been discussed, you were even in the discussion in regards to OSCE:

Learn what it is if it didn't get through the first time:

Mind you, you agreed with everything said in the end, but here we see that is the complete opposite and the clear expectation that no one would realize it til now.

@James Thomas Rook Jr. Granted we have the Lucis Trust, the people of the Grove, E.I.I., the Shadow Government, democracized media, The Global Mafia, Soros and friends sit around watching their money go to work on the Left and the Right fighting, a 2nd Civil War looming around as well as talks of WW 3 depending on a certain ally of the US, the UN taking notes on trying to shift the amendments, and a list of other things, you'd be surprise of how many people are not a fan of government, mainly if you take the time to go to the deepest and darkest areas to find information.

One of my very reasons I do not take kindly to politics and politicians, mainly when you actually find out the truth of things out of the wave of mixed social media and conspiracy.

For all things must be carefully researched and analyzed to see the real conclusion.

Well it is only going to get worse. People spend so much time on churches and schools without looking at those who are pushing to make pedophilia legal, with majority from the LGBT community in support the movement for LGBTP, the P at the end is refers to Pedosexual, the end result would be as told before, pedophilia will surge and more of them will break out the floodgates and hit institutions even harder.

That being said, this should not be a surprise, granted how easily one with a pedophilia disorder (they removed it from the list of disorders some months ago and the reason is obvious) can make their way to children by gaining trust, authority, respect, reputation, etc. So it is very tough to catch these kinds of people if people do not know the basic signs, one of them is if someone is way too close with the kid and giving way too many gifts and or other, keeping secrets and whatnot. So for some it isn't that easy.

As for the 1,006 count, the number is far more lower than that granted some were pointed out as allegations, mainly unproven ones, I believe the numbers have been posted here some months ago.

Other than that, pedophilia is a big problem, for if no one is going to tackle the issue the right way and the smartest way, the problem will continue to grow and now we see a big fight with people pushing to make it legal to the point the teachings of making such a legality has been on TED Talks already. In a simple sense, one is too bust getting his house rid of termites, but never goes for the nest. But the way I see it, the whole sexual orientation movement has already got a head start in that fight while all of us are lollygagging around.

9 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Nearly beheaded?

What?  They left a flap of skin?

They crazy glued it back on?

In parts of the country, some people are backed by laws and regulations and preaching to someone, mainly if they are of Islam can land you in some serious trouble, for some people, it is considered justice to exact punishment, some on the other hand thing silencing someone for good is the viable option so one has to be very weary about whom they speak or read the Bible to because you may just win the jackpot with an individual who takes the message the wrong way and thinks a consequence must be in play. In this guy's case, he dodged a bullet, or for this situation, a sword swing for he was informed of what these people who were not a fan of his conversion and what the had to say and these people were going to do something serious, but before they could the man in question was long gone.

Long story short, one has to not just be careful of the area they speak the gospel in, mainly if you are a regular and or live in said area, but one have to be very weary of whom they speak the gospel to, especially those who are not a fan of the gospel, to the extent they would actually do something about it, from minor things to major that is deemed dangerous and or confrontational. For, persecution is like a bag of Skittles mixed in with M&M's. you can pick one and get any color, and you might have one that is a fruity taste or chocolate, so it is down right random and can spin out of control fast for some people in certain areas.

It can get worse, but luckily it did not, I know a girl who lives in Egypt, her father was nearly beheaded because he spoke of God, for he was learning. Apparently speaking of God or of one's faith, mainly at this point, Christianity should spell disaster for some people, but it seems the Coptic Church is exempted from that madness.

It can get far worse depending on where you live from minor to major things, even being subjected to occult/black magic and other forms of craziness and gruesome brutality.

@JW Insider There is little to no activity of Wahabbism, in the 1970s when things change there was a bit of presence there, I think around the late 1970s like 1978-1979 or something like that. But yeah, Syria and Iran are at this time cool with each other, but Israel and the Saudis do not like them, mainly if taking into account the major allies they have behind them.

On 8/12/2018 at 1:47 AM, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

We need to be compassionate and understanding of other cultures, and ways of life.

They have a hard and uncomfortable life, and are naturally very, very irritable.

The women wear black cargo tents in the hot summer sun,  and likewise the men's fashions are hot and scratchy, especially the bomb vests.

Not all Muslims are evil people ... I mean ... statistically.

It depends. When you zero it down, you are 2 main groups (although like Christianity and Judaism, even Islam has several denominations), the Sunnis and the Shias. Sunnis have several branches and one of them is Wahhabism, of which tends to be the more tougher among the others, these guys do not like normal Sunnis like them and they have somewhat of a hatred for Shia Muslims. Wahhabism has been taken and used and cranked up to 11 by radicalized Islam that has nothing to do with the others, hence being a faction in of itself, for they, among realized Islam believe they can bring forth The End, Armageddon by creating the most violent, death and destruction to all men they deem as infidels, not realizing they are on a demented path.

This extreme form of Wahhabism is the result of the US involvement in the Middle East, back in the days of Osama Bin Laden's Father, Mohammed bin Awad bin Laden.

Let's just say there was a lot of people involved in this mess, one person's last name starting with B and ending with H, and is the senior.

 

That being said, the Middle East has changed, I mean, it looked way nicer back in the day prior to Wahhabism, Iran being an example [video cuts halfway at 4:26 for it is that old, as in VHS-levels of old]

 

 

@TheWorldNewsOrg Insulting of an ally begets consequences (necessary friendly-fire). That is how the Global Mafia works in terms of the Shadow Government.

Annnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnd it's going up and up and up, etc. etc. etc.

http://www.usdebtclock.org

@James Thomas Rook Jr. Seconded. Everyone is different, good people and bad people. But even in this day and age, if a man of a nation does something bad, the mentality of people will lead them not blame the man, but the whole nation for the actions of the man, in this sense, it is like saying the a man in Liverpool is known for his harsh insults and rudeness and because of this man, everyone in Liverpool, and in the United Kingdom are like this man, when the reality is, not everyone follows and mimics the man who speaks insults.

@James Thomas Rook Jr. I have seen some JWs with disabilities and or some form of mental illness, some of which are among the children that I had overseen in the past before. Not sure if ones with literal physical deformities to the body, be it young or old, but it has been said even those who bear such are capable of doing the ministry. Plus it is 2018 now, surely things have changed up since then.

Other than that, it depends on the individual in or out of the church, are they equipped and or able to handle such children and or adults or not? Can one tend to those of special needs, be it in a church, work environment and or other? Can one capable of handling conflict, majority negative verbal insults and or hate to someone; someone who is harassing the child/adult who is indeed of special treatment and or care?

You cannot assume that you can build a bird house without tools, but you have the wood, nor can you be confident in building a bird house, if you now have wood, but no tools. Therefore, being ill-equipped.

Being equipped, able and knowledgeable in how to build such a thing, requires both tools and wood. Catch my drift? Not the best analogies, but in a way it has some sense to it.

Things of that nature.

Unfortunately one has to stand up for their belief in the Bible, in my experience, it was a bit harsh, it consist of both hate, racism a chalk full of discrimination being directed towards me and several instances of the same person attempting to provoke me so I can physically hit him, in an attempt to play the blame game to pin the accusations against me, another instance is where I almost did something because I was pushed to do so, but I merely pinned the same kid down and it was only then he had been exposed for what he has been doing to people who is not the same race as him, and I guess that pin down caused the other kids to speak up finally when they saw the bully on the ground, mind you this was the 3rd grade, granted the fact at the time, most American kids were not aware of someone their age who knows twice as much as they do of not just the Bible, but of a lot of other things, education and learning was kid key in my household since I was on the islands.

I was not Nationalistic or Patriotic either, for when I was 10, when 9/11 happened, when the Twin Towers fell, I remember someone, my age, saying why didn't America stop the plane and save all those people, as I grew older, I know the truth and how monstrous people can be, the blood of all those was of government hands by means of corruption and money and power, should such have not been in place at the time, those Towers would have still been standing, but this is the price they pay for messing around in the Middle East, but history repeat itself and we can see this now being played out by world powers and their supporters.

Other than that, such is the reason why I can be very strict when it comes to history, the Bible and other things because the way I see it, it is as if I am back in that class, despite being a young adult now. Unlike my younger self though I am more restraint, I do not pin people down physically, if anything, I throw knowledgeable punch with facts, reasoning, and logic, and expose some people for speaking things that are false and or of conspiracy - for, knowledge is indeed power.

There will be always someone for or against you, so being on a defense is always key, for at times it is not the faith they target, it is your race, your background, the way you look either physically or the say you dress, they care not for who you are as a person because they brand you the second they discover who you are and or what you follow.

But that being said, if a child is very, very intelligent for his or her own good, all that can be said is for this young one to prepare for the storm, the storm can be positive at times, and negative. For some parents do not give a phone or a tablet to a child to play games all day without breaks, Temple Run, Candy Crush, or what have you, perhaps that new Fortnite nonsense that is blowing up, on the other side of the spectrum, some parents give physical books, have a give do research and more.

Letters of Paul

The First Epistle to Timothy

1 Timothy 3:16

Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.

 

? Proof of Trinitarian Error

Trinitarians claim this verse identifies Jesus as "God" because it says "God was manifested in the flesh." - KJV

? The Claims vs. The Facts

The manuscript evidence, and the immediate context, shows the King James Verison (KJV) reading was not authored by Apostle Paul.

? The Problems with the claims of Trinitarians

Modern translations do not read, "God" at 1 Timothy 3:16. Trinitarians, as do majority of folks of the mainstream, make this particular claim by quoting only from the King James Version reading of this verse. Despite the fact that scholars agree that the KJV reading is a certain corruption, Trinitarians, even those who normally do not read the KJV, continue to cherry-pick this verse from the KJV.

During the time of the Christological controversies that took place in the 4th Century, we do not see even one solitary person making a reference to the "God was manifested in the flesh" version of this verse as evidence for identifying Jesus as "God." This fact does itself undeniably demonstrate it was unknown to them.

NOTE: Even the Bible says God is not like a man or a son of man (Numbers 23:19, 1 Samuel 15:29), furthermore, it is said God is not like us men (Job 9:32).

If 1 Timothy 3:16 really said "God was manifest in the flesh," we can most definitely be sure this passage would have most been brought, yet, not one person mentions it even though this passage more than any other would have supported the teaching that the incarnate Christ was "God." But the facts remain as they are and it was never mentioned once in the myriads of documentation that exist illustrating what was argued in these types of debates. There is a good reason that nobody in the 4th century church ever mentioned the passage. The word "God" did not appear in 1 Timothy 3:16 until much later. It first appears in Patristic Writings and manuscripts after Trinitarian dogma was developed and is an obvious later alteration. The oldest and best manuscripts do not have the word "God" (theos) in 1 Timothy 3:16 which is why modern Bible translations do not have the word "God" at 1 Timothy 3:16 either.

1. Contemporary Trinitarian Translation Scholars

Now because this verse is known to be a scribal error, contemporary Trinitarian Greek scholars, who have access to numerous manuscripts, have not been able to perpetuate this error any longer into English translations, despite the passions of some who desire the word "God" to appear in this verse at the expense of truth.

The verse in question used by Trinitarians and the common translations that they use will show the verse this way, as seen in the KJV:

[KJV/NKJV] - And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

Let us look at some of the major translations of this passage and note how Trinitarian Greek scholars themselves acknowledged the scribal error:

• [CEV] - Here is the great mystery of our religion: Christ came as a human. The Spirit proved that he pleased God, and he was seen by angels. Christ was preached to the nations. People in this world put their faith in him, and he was taken up to glory.
• [NASB] - By common confession, great is the mystery of godliness: He who was revealed in the flesh, Was vindicated in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Proclaimed among the nations, Believed on in the world, Taken up in glory.
• [BSB] - By common confession, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeared in the flesh, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was proclaimed among the nations, was believed in throughout the world, was taken up in glory.
• [BLB] - And confessedly, great is the mystery of godliness: Who was revealed in the flesh, was justified in the Spirit, was seen by angels, was proclaimed among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory.
• [NIV] - Without question, this is the great mystery of our faith: Christ was revealed in a human body and vindicated by the Spirit. He was seen by angels and announced to the nations. He was believed in throughout the world and taken to heaven in glory.
• [ESV] - Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.
• [NWT] - Indeed, the sacred secret of this godly devotion is admittedly great: ‘He was made manifest in flesh, was declared righteous in spirit, appeared to angels, was preached about among nations, was believed upon in the world, was received up in glory.Â’
• [ASV] - And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness; He who was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the spirit, Seen of angels, Preached among the nations, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory.
• [ERV] - And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness; He who was manifested in the flesh, justified in the spirit, seen of angels, preached among the nations, believed on in the world, received up in glory.
• [RSV] - Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of our religion: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated in the Spirit, seen by angels, preached among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.
• [NRSV] - Without any doubt, the mystery of our religion is great: He was revealed in flesh, vindicated in spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among Gentiles, believed in throughout the world, taken up in glory.
• [Douey-Rheims] - And evidently great is the mystery of godliness, which was manifested in the flesh, was justified in the spirit, appeared unto angels, hath been preached unto the Gentiles, is believed in the world, is taken up in glory.
• [NET] - And we all agree, our religion contains amazing revelation: He was revealed in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among Gentiles, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.
• [NAB] - Undeniably great is the mystery of devotion, Who[a] was manifested in the flesh, vindicated in the spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed to the Gentiles, believed in throughout the world, taken up in glory.

Very clearly we can see here that the Trinitarian translation scholars are admitting this version of the verse is not authentic. One then wonders why Trinitarians so often continue to ignorantly, or dishonestly, appeal to it.

2. Ho, Hos & Theos

Now, if we entertain all possibilities, the remote and the more certain, there are actually three possibilities in this text: ho ("which"), hos ("who"), and "theos ("God/deity"). The first two are attested in early manuscripts. Thus one must look elsewhere to find which one is the one Apostle Paul originally wrote.

 

3. One Small Pen Stroke

We actually have a pretty likely idea how this corruption happened. Scribal copyists routinely used a contracted form of the Greek word for "God" called a "nomem sacrum" (pl. "nomina sacra") that was used at a very early date in Christian history for sacred names. The Greek word for "God" is theos written in the Greek alphabet as qeoV, or QEOS. The copyist abbreviations correspondingly took the form qV, or QS, with an faint overscore line stroke over the abbreviation (see Figure 1 below). These strokes would often become quite faint in the copies. Now the Greek word for "who" is the word hos which is written in Greek as oV, or OS.

Now notice the similarity between these two words QS, and OS, and also remember they were written by hand and would not be written so perfectly and distinctly as the typed letters on this page. With the exception of one penstroke, the Omicron (O) and Theta (Q) are nearly identical. It would be very easy to make a mistake here when copying from one manuscript to another and if that is what happened then it would be excusable. But it would also be very easy for an overzealous scribe to suppose he was doing God a favor and execute a forgery here by changing the manuscript and the handwritten O (Omicron) into a Q (Theta) with a stroke of his pen and thereby completely change the meaning of the verse. It would be also easy to change the word ho to theos by adding a stroke and an "s."

And it would be far more difficult to do it the other way around without getting caught (removing the stroke). There is also evidence that ink may have bled through the other side of the media and made it appear to a copyist to read QS because the bleeding ink added what appeared to be a line where OS had been written. Whether or not it was an honest copying mistake or a forgery, it is very likely that the error was produced in this manner.

 

Figure 1

The Manuscript Evidence

Manuscript Common Name Date Text B Codex Vaticanus ca. 300 Does not contain 1 Timothy Aleph Codex Sinaiticus ca. 350 who was manifest in flesh A Codex Alexandrinus ca. 450 who was manifest in flesh C Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus ca. 450 who was manifest in flesh D Codex Claromontanus ca. 550 which was manifest in flesh   Peshitta Coptic Ethiopic Sahidic   which was manifest in flesh   Gothic   which was manifest in flesh

Patristic Witness

Quotations of 1 Timothy 3:16 in the Fathers Author Reference Date Evidence Comments Ante-Nicene Church All Writings 70-325 A.D. None Not quoted by any writer before Nicea Arian Controversy Church All Writings 325 - 381 A.D. None Not quoted by any writer until late in the fourth century

6. The Internal Evidence

A. The Greek Grammar

The internal evidence also reveals the truth of the matter. First, the passage does not say "in the flesh" with a definite article but simply "in flesh." The word eusebias translated as "godliness" is difficult to translate into English with a word that exacts the Greek intention. The word "godliness" is a justified translation of the word and it is about as good as we can do with the selection of English words we have available. However, it does tend to over translate the Greek scope of the word. This is a common problem when translating from one language to another. The Greek word does not precisely mean what the English word "godly" tends to convey but it means something like reverent piety in a worshipful sense. The Greek words for "God" and "godliness" which are theos and eusebias are not related word cognates as they are in English. This can also tend to be misleading to readers who speak/read in English who might conclude the word "godliness" in this passage is intended to correlate with the word "God" in the KJV translation.

However, in Greek the word eusebias and theos do not bear that correlation. Also, there were also no sentence ending periods in the Greek text. If the word "which" is the proper rendering, the passage actually says in the Greek, "great is the mystery of godliness which was manifested in flesh, justified in spirit..." However, if the word "God" is used we have an abrupt break in the flow of the sentence, "great is the mystery of godliness. God was manifest in flesh, justified in spirit..." The rendering which uses the word "who" or "which" is much smoother and natural. Not only so, it is typical Pauline style to compose run-on sentences.

b. The Immediate Context and Pauline Thought

And there is yet more which reveals this verse was corrupted. Paul here is talking about the mystery. In 2 Timothy 1:8-9 he says:

[8] Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord, nor of me his prisoner, but share in suffering for the gospel by the power of God, [9] who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began,

This is nearly identical to what he says in Romans 16:25:

Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages

 

In Ephesians 1:9-10 he says:

[9] making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ [10] as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.

Or Ephesians 3:9:

and to bring to light for everyone what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God, who created all things,

Or Ephesians 5:32:

This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church.

Or Ephesians 6:19:

and also for me, that words may be given to me in opening my mouth boldly to proclaim the mystery of the gospel,

Or Colossians 4:3:

At the same time, pray also for us, that God may open to us a door for the word, to declare the mystery of Christ, on account of which I am in prison—

For, the mystery of the ages is Christ himself revealed to us by God. He tells us in Colossians, "the glory of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory" (Col. 1:27, see 1 Cor. 1:30; 2:7). God's mystery appeared in flesh and Christ is that fleshly manifestation of His mystery.

God was Justified in the Spirit?

Another problem associated with the "God" rendering is that if we just keep reading it would then say that God was justified in the Spirit. It makes absolutely no sense to say God was justified in the Spirit, God was seen by angels, God was preached among the Gentiles, God was believed on in the world, and God was received into glory."

C. Paul's Vocabulary Elsewhere

At Colossians 1:27 we read:

• To them God chose to make known how great among the Gentiles are the riches of the glory of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.

The relative pronoun used here is the masculine relative pronoun hos which refers back to the neuter noun "mystery." This is nearly identical to 1 Timothy 3:16 which ends with the phrase "taken up in glory." Hence we can see that hos is the likely relative pronoun to be used at 1 Timothy 3:16.

D. Constructio Ad Sensum

Trinitarians have sometimes insisted the gender of the pronoun in question necessitates in Greek grammar the "God" rendering. This is highly misleading. Pronouns do not always refer to the immediate antecedent but sometimes to the contextual antecedent.

Determining Factors

Quote

Trinitarians are appealing to a version of a text which is known to be a scribal error.           Modern Trinitarian translation reflect that Trinitarian translation scholars admit this is a scribal error. Therefore, they do not translate this passage in a way that supports Trinitarian doctrine           We have a pretty good idea that this error was accomplished by either (1) one additional stroke of a pen changing the Greek word from "who" to "God" or (2) by two additional strokes of a pen changing the Greek word from "which" to God, or (3) by ink bleeding through the media.           This version of the verse cannot be found absolutely anywhere in early Christian writings before the Trinity was developed. Considering the fourth and fifth century men were having a crisis in the church concerning the nature of Christ and his relationship to God, it is preposterous to claim this version of the verse is valid and they overlooked this passage.           No early manuscripts contain this version of the verse. The corrupted version of this text appears only after the doctrine of the Trinity was developed in the fourth/fifth century.           The Greek grammar and immediate context also indicates this rendering is wrong.

Conclusion

So when we review all the evidence the solution is plain to see. The historical evidence indicates the word "God" was not there before the late fourth century at the earliest. The manuscript evidence indicates the word "God" was not in the original text. The grammar and the immediate context also indicate the KJV reading is not authentic. Christ is the mystery in question which is why the passage should read, "great is the mystery of godliness who/which was manifested in flesh, justified in spirit..." It "which" is correct it refers back the mystery; if "who" is correct it refers to Christ. Very obviously then the passage reads smoothly and makes total sense with the rest of Scripture by using either the word "who" or "which" which are attested in early manuscripts, as well as the KJV reading is an obvious error or forgery.

Great is the mystery of godliness which/who was manifested in flesh."

@Srecko Sostar 

31 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

How can not you to understand that Abraham is just human like others. He did some good and some not good in life. He did something about he can be proud and something that can be discussed an questioned from today standpoint. You want to put him in sky and stars and in same time telling me (expect from me) that i need to adore or even bow down or worship him because of what he is/are or represent. Please be reasonable.

You ask me ones what would i do if i would be in "his sandals", when he an Sara was "acting to be brother and sister"? Let me ask you, just for sake of discussion, you have no obligation to answer,  "What would you do that your wife offer you young girl, her slave, made, friend, what ever she is, because two of you  can not have children (or for some other reason)?" Would you make love with her for such purpose?"

Abraham did so. And it looks he was liked Hagar much and she liked him, and loved her, fall in love with her.  Who wouldn't fall  in love with young beautiful female. Did he broke some principles? If looked from Old patriarchal way of living - No! it was common not only to God chosen people, but also for Not God chosen people (non God worshipers) for Society of those period of time, before and after.  What example and role model giving his experience with Hagar for people living today.

He and Hagar not experienced Gods anger. Only family problems with jealous Sara :))) 

Did you forget what you stated in your own words and yet contridiction your very words here also?

That being said, you should also be very aware of Sarah agreement with Abraham in regards to Hagar, mind you, she wanted a son. Also I asked you what if you were in Abraham's sandals int terms of the Sister-Wife narrative, not of Hagar, do not try shift what was asked of you, Sostar because it can most definitely be used against you, just like the claim of yours that Abraham was selfish, when his action was the very reason Jesus was born in Bethlehem and what was spoken of in Galatians 3:28, 29, which is not a true statement of being One in Christ, but of the one of whom Paul speaks of, the mane named Abraham, who whom you called selfish.

Other than that, if you want to continue speaking of Abraham, do so in the other thread, because this time Admin will not come to save you here, therefore, keep the discussion as it is, of women and of religious leadership because clearly, the Old Testament is not even in your favor right now, and it will never be in regards to the topic.

7 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Please Space, if Deborah gave word to Barak, did she only been messenger? I would say that she became, maybe by not her own will, person who take responsibility of leadership as Commander of army too. So by that she was important person in chain of command. And she went on battle field! You said in your explanation that (and confirmed my statement) by saying;"... under the command of Barak and Prophetess Deborah.." 

And yet in your last response you stated this about Prophetess Deborah,

Srecko Quote: "Deborah who served as military and legal leader for nation in book of Judges" false information, because we know of Deborah to be a Prophetess and a Judge of the Nation of Israel. As for the past several years, people have negated Deborah's role as a Prophetess of God to make the claim she was indeed a military leader, but they ignore the fact that she was the one given command to give word to Barak in the first place, although she followed Barak, he was the one to lead the tribes mentioned into battle, for such has only been spoken on in prophecy by the Prophetess, as she had done in regards to Jael. We also know these same people do not speak of Barak as being a ruler of Ancient Israel and military commander, mainly when it is known as to who his Father is.

Now, there is no question to anyone that Judges can be and served in some form of military based service, but this is never seen in regards of Prophetess Deborah (perhaps Spiritual Leader as some would say), who was not the one to be physically fighting and or commanding an army, she simply gave word to Barak of what God had said, for God had seen the 20 years of oppression. We know some Judges did fight and lead people, for instance, Judge Shamgar, who slaughtered about 600 Philistines with an ox goad and or cattle goad and he is accredited to have saved Israel as seen in Judges 3:31, despite succumbing to death in his 1st year of being a Judge, according to Josephus, we also have Gideon, and Ehud, to name a few, perhaps Samson, who fought in a battle himself. Granted that both Deborah and Barak were dealing with Sisera, and what we know Sisera is capable of and what he tends to do with his so called spoils, clearly Deborah would not be in the battlefield, and granted she was a Prophetess, compared to the others who are of the same role as her.

We know the actual truth of the matter when we read the following verse:

• Judges 4:4-5 - [4] Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was judging Israel at that time. [5] She used to sit under the palm of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim, and the people of Israel came up to her for judgment.

 

Now then Srecko, I stated you are confusing the information because we see nowhere that Prophetess Deborah served as a military commander or the like (something of which other Judges who I have mentioned already, have done, but not this Prophetess), and it is already know that she is a Judge of the Nation of Israel. She did give a message, granted her position as not only a Judge of the Nation of Israel, but also a Prophetess, remember, a Prophetess is a female counterpart of a Prophet, we should already be aware of what a Prophet actually is: a person regarded as an inspired teacher or proclaimer of the will of God.

Continuing on from the verses above we also read the following to correct these claims of yours: "I would say that she became, maybe by not her own will, person who take responsibility of leadership as Commander of army too. So by that she was important person in chain of command. "

• [6] She sent and summoned Barak the son of Abinoam from Kedesh-naphtali and said to him, “Has not the Lord [YHWH], the God of Israel, commanded you, ‘Go, gather your men at Mount Tabor, taking 10,000 from the people of Naphtali and the people of Zebulun. [7] And I will draw out Sisera, the general of Jabin's army, to meet you by the river Kishon with his chariots and his troops, and I will give him into your hand’?”

We can see here that she summoned Barak for God has used her in order to summon and choose Barak in the first place, for Barak was indeed both a ruler and an actual military commander and had she said these things to him as well as making known to him a fortelling, for if she had led the military and or is a military commander, it would have stated that in the Book of Judges and there wouldn't be a need for Barak or God having the Prophetess send for him, but clearly we see nothing of the sort because we know of how Barak's involvement by means of Scripture. After contacting Barak and informing him of the situation and what God had said, Barak said the following in the next verse:
 

• [8] Barak said to her [Deborah], “If you will go with me, I will go, but if you will not go with me, I will not go.” [9] And she said, “I will surely go with you. Nevertheless, the road on which you are going will not lead to your glory, for the Lord will sell Sisera into the hand of a woman.”
   

And as I said, both Deborah and Barak had the same common interest in liberating Israel from an enemy, and because of this, Prophetess Deborah went with Barak.

• [9b] Then Deborah arose and went with Barak to Kedesh. [10] And Barak called out Zebulun and Naphtali to Kedesh. And 10,000 men went up at his heels, and Deborah went up with him.

As for your next response, how are you so sure that she went onto the Battlefield fighting and leading? Of all people a Judge who is a Prophetess unless you are willing to show us a verse or two, or perhaps a passage? The account very clear, for it states that Deborah went with Barak, for Barak not only allowed her to follow him due to common interest, but because God's presence by means of the Prophetess, you know, the same God who through Deborah who summoned Barak a military commander to begin with. Moreover, we see in the verses itself of who is leading Zbulun and Naphtali to Kedesh to begin with, we see who is leading the 10,000 men among such ones, and Deborah followed went with them, and not only does the Bible says such, but historic accounts that lines up with the Bible says so as well.

Here is an actual fact: Deborah summoned Barak, the son of Abinoam, from his home at Kedesh in Naphtali, and ordered him, in the name of YHWH, to take ten thousand men to Mount Tabor. He agrees to on condition that Deborah should go with him. Here he was attacked, as Deborah had expected, by Sisera, whose forces were put to flight, and the greater part of them slain, by Barak's army (Barak, Jewish Encyclopedia)

So your response: So by that she was important person in chain of command. And she went on battle field! 
 

Is unfounded for even Biblical and historical facts of the Hebrew Bible speaks for itself, hence no mention of her actually fighting and taking chair in the field itself. The fighting forces were led by and commanded by Barak to fight against Sisera and his army. Deborah was a Prophetess and a Judge who also was very not liking of Sisera, who by means of God summoned Barak and foretold what was to come, and because of this, Barak accepts in condition that Deborah comes with him, in which she does for the both of them to see it through that their enemy, and God's enemy, is defeated.

Plus it is evident that everyone and anyone is aware that Barak is God's chosen military leader for the task at hand.

As for this: You said in your explanation that (and confirmed my statement) by saying;"... under the command of Barak and Prophetess Deborah.." 

If you actually took into account the whole statement I made I said the following, why stop at a small portion? Anyways the quote in full was this: The one of whom Deborah spoke to was Barak, for he was a ruler of Ancient Israel as well as a military commander as seen in The Book of Judges. Barak, with Prophetess Deborah, from the Tribe of Ephraim, the prophet and 4th Judge of pre-monarchic Israel, defeated the Canaanite armies led by Sisera. For Sisera was was commander of the Canaanite army of King Jabin of Ha'zor, who is mentioned in Judges 4-5 of the Hebrew Old Testament. After being defeated by the forces of the Israelite Tribes, that of both Zebulun and Naphtali, under the command of Barak and Prophetess Deborah, Sisera was defeated and was killed by Jael, who hammered a tent peg into his temple.

We know that Barak and Deborah were not friends with Sisera who was of the enemy of whom the people of Israel had been oppressed by Jabin, the king of Ca'naan, whose capital was Ha'zor, for 20 years - the very reason this Prophetess and Judge came into play to begin with.

Barak was the one who gave command and Deborah's command came forth by means of a message, from God which led to the summoning of Barak, check out the references if you have the time. For, we are even aware of what Prophetess Deborah had stated when she said the following in Judges 4:14:

• Go! This is the day the Lord has given Sisera into your hands. Has not the Lord gone ahead of you?" So Barak went down Mount Tabor, with ten thousand men following him.

7 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

You confuse me dear friend :))))

Why would I be confuse about something of the Hebrew Old Testament of which I had read through and studied time and time again for nearly 18+ years? The confusion is your claim that Deborah was a military commander of some sort, we do not see anything of the like in the Book of Judges (although some who make this claim negate/exclude Barak totally), so I'd be careful to speak of confusion, after all, you have shown confusion throughout this thread, just as you have with Chloe.

7 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Another woman came on scene. Jael. We see that Deborah and Jael was much more heroic than Barak. SO WHO IS BETTER HEAD IN THIS CASE, FEMALE OR MALE? :))) With Church or without Church, we discuss about does woman have ability, permission, possibility, obligation, prohibition, advice, and similar -  to do same things as male doing. 

Yes, Jael, also known as Yael, The wife of Heber the Kenite (a non-Israelite), in addition, the Kenite people were a Nomadic Tribe, some of whom lived very close to the Israelite people. In the Bible, it records a number of cases of intermarriage of the people, and the father-in-law of Moses was apparently a Kenite, but it is not clear if this was in fact Jethro. She is mentioned in the Book of Judges in the Hebrew Bible, as the heroine/hero who killed Sisera to deliver Israel from the troops of King Jabin. The last time we spoke of her you were against her actions, as in Spiritual Warfare and Civil Obedience and the very fact she is seen as a hero, to even women today, granted her title being: Slayer of The Canaanite Army Chief, Sisera.

After Sisera was defeated by Barak's forces, he fled to a neutral Heber camp, and this is where he has met with the woman, Jael, who had invited him into her tent. Jael took care of him, she then covered him with a blanket. When Sisera asked for water she gave him a bowl of curdled milk to drink. While being very relaxed, Sisera was the one to had ask her to stand guard, for he knew being defeated, Barak's forces would come for him. For he had thought to himself that he was secured by means of Jael. Eventually, Sisera fell asleep for it is evident this man was exhausted, granted how he fled this far out. At this moment, Jael, took this opportunity to take up a tent peg, sneak into the tent of where Sisera was sleeping in, then she quietly went to him, armed with a hammer and a tent peg that she drove through his head, instantly killing Sisera in his sleep.

Barak finally tracked down the last area Sisera was in only for Jael to confront Barak and showed him the corpse/dead body of The Army Chief, Sisera, for Sisera is now dead at the hand of a woman,  as foretold by Prophetess Deborah foretold in Judges 4:9 and 17-22.

• And she said, “I will surely go with you. Nevertheless, the road on which you are going will not lead to your glory, for the Lord will sell Sisera into the hand of a woman.” Then Deborah arose and went with Barak to Kedesh.
• [17] But Sisera fled away on foot to the tent of Jael, the wife of Heber the Kenite, for there was peace between Jabin the king of Hazor and the house of Heber the Kenite. [18] And Jael came out to meet Sisera and said to him, “Turn aside, my lord; turn aside to me; do not be afraid.” So he turned aside to her into the tent, and she covered him with a rug. [19] And he said to her, “Please give me a little water to drink, for I am thirsty.” So she opened a skin of milk and gave him a drink and covered him. [20] And he said to her, “Stand at the opening of the tent, and if any man comes and asks you, ‘Is anyone here?’ say, ‘No.’” [21] But Jael the wife of Heber took a tent peg, and took a hammer in her hand. Then she went softly to him and drove the peg into his temple until it went down into the ground while he was lying fast asleep from weariness. So he died. [22] And behold, as Barak was pursuing Sisera, Jael went out to meet him and said to him, “Come, and I will show you the man whom you are seeking.” So he went in to her tent, and there lay Sisera dead, with the tent peg in his temple.

Because of Jael's actions, and courageous act against a threat to the Israelites, the one who was deemed an enemy of God, this prompted a song of victory of Prophetess Deborah, Judge of the Nation of Israel, and of military commander and ancient ruler of Israel, Barak, which also pronounces Jael most blessed among women as seen in Judges 5:6 and 24-27.
 

• “In the days of Shamgar, son of Anath, in the days of Jael, the highways were abandoned, and travelers kept to the byways.
• [24] “Most blessed of women be Jael, the wife of Heber the Kenite, of tent-dwelling women most blessed. [25] He asked for water and she gave him milk; she brought him curds in a noble's bowl. [26] She sent her hand to the tent peg and her right hand to the workmen's mallet; she struck Sisera; she crushed his head; she shattered and pierced his temple. [27] Between her feet he sank, he fell, he lay still; between her feet he sank, he fell; where he sank, there he fell—dead.

As for your response: With Church or without Church, we discuss about does woman have ability, permission, possibility, obligation, prohibition, advice, and similar -  to do same things as male doing. 

The focus from the start was of the church and religious leadership, and even before that it was already stated using Deborah's role as Prophetess and Judge has nothing to do with church leadership and or the like. It is already established that a JW or anything of them will not save you here, and it is most likely the Admin will not save you here also.

But I like how you attempt to shift religious leadership into the Hebrew Old Testament of things, classic Srecko Sostar when it comes to adding and or changing discussion as time progresses, mind you, you seem to show opinion and feeling of church leadership prior to this, but I guess the so called story that sister was indeed made up after all if you changed this fast.

But what I find quite amusing is not too long ago you said the following: Do you want suggesting something about JHVH and why he chose Deborah for leading position over all nation, over all males, elders, patriarchs? 

The thing is, the focus of the discussion of of women, yes, but of religious leadership roles, if you forgot, read through the first page again, remember, you did try to twist and use Paul's work already.
 

7 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

O WHO IS BETTER HEAD IN THIS CASE, FEMALE OR MALE? :)))

And why must the game of favoritism be played? Last I checked, none of these women had anything to do with religious leadership of authority and or hold pastoral office in a church.

7 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

After all, both, male and female doing very beautiful and very ugly things. And they are doing that with and/or without God and/or Church! 

The Hebrew Old Testament has some of the most brutal things that had taken place, such being from either men or women in this case. But nowhere in the Hebrew Old Testament it is shown that women held an office in a Church. Using a Prophetess and a Judge is seen as cowardly in terms of discussion, granted the actual Biblical Fact technically foreshadowed such in this regard, mainly by the likes of you, Sostar.

Therefore, as I said earlier in this discussion, using a Prophetess does not prove religious leadership, and using someone like Deborah is not going to help either, granted she is a not just a Prophetess, but a Judge among Judges of Israel.

7 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

I found something interesting on web. Here it is:

Of course you did, and that infomration also defeats your earlier response, let's see how this is actucally true.
Also I found the source of where you pulled that information (of course the very first link of Google via search, typical move made by typical people) https://obscurecharacters.com/2013/11/08/barak-a-reluctant-commander/

I show the link here so people can see where you got your information.

You also seem to skip the very first parts and skip straight to Analysis.
 

7 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

God’s reason for choosing Barak for the Israelite commander is not clear. Deborah lived in southern Ephriam. Surely, there was an Israelite man who could lead the Israelites who lived closer than Kedesh, Barak’s home in northern Naphtali. On the other hand, Kedesh was only about 5 miles from Hazor. Barak personal experience with Jabin’s domination motivated him to throw off the Canaanite oppression.

Barak’s caution when Deborah’s called him to be war commander of Israel seems appropriate for three reasons. First, the proximity of Kedesh and Hazor allowed Barak to know the magnitude of Jabin’s army along with its chariots. To Barak, the Canaanite army was beyond formidable. Second, the Bible gave no indication that Barak had battle experience. Likely his father Abinoam was a clan leader in Naphtali (Judges 5:12-13). Probably Barak had experience with decision making for a small group of men, but definitely not for an army of 10,000 men. Third, Deborah held court near Bethel, approximately 80 miles from Barak’s home town. Barak may not have known Deborah well; thus he was not sure that she spoke for God rather than herself. Barak must have been reassured when Deborah agreed to go with the Israelite army. Deborah was putting her life on the line along with Barak and the Israelite men.

Barak’s response showed that he focused on Sisera’s seasoned, well-equipped army rather than God’s power and plan, e.g., God plan to lure the Canaanites into the Kishon river valley. Because of Barak’s failure to fully trust God, this Israelite victory over the mighty Canaanite army is remembered more for Jael’s subterfuge than Barak’s leadership.

You stated that Deborah who served as military and legal leader for nation in book of Judges.

The information you linked stated otherwise. An the primary focus of this linked information was of Barak.

Granted he, Barak, was the Son of Abinoam of Kedesh within the territory of Naphtali. During an early period in the time for 20 years the people endured oppression by Jabin, the king of Ca'naan- it is history after all. The oppressed ones cried out to God, and eventually it was then that Barak became their appointed leader as we can read in Judges 4:1-3.

On the other hand, the oppressors under Jabin were heavily armed to the teeth as we can see in Judges 5:8. But, in Barak’s day, God gave Israel victory over their foes, a a fight that was won and such that was not forgotten, see Psalms 83:9. Only 2 accounts of these matters are shown in the Bible and by means of history, an that is in the Book of Judges, the chapters already being known because it has already been mentioned, and the both of them are complements each other and shows us a clear picture of what took place during that time.

That being said, God has not broke his own principle in regards to the Church, granted churches only came about in and around Jesus' day, from infancy to adulthood into his death and resurrection, hence what was said in The Gospel of Matthew chapter 16 and what was seen onward. But attempting to compare Judges to a church will not do much for you, granted I even stated that women do have roles and I told you before that some women, including Sarah (of whom you called her Husband, Abraham, Selfish), are seen as Heroes, but it is not surprise you say something different oppose to what you have stated before, this goes for Jael too.

That being said, you pretty much linked information from a source that only defeats what you said originally, you can't delete that one.

And you've yet to prove the case on Chloe because after being corrected (the very reason you shift away from her in regards to your claim), once again, you make no mention of such, if you want we can speak on Judges, but as stated before, using a Judge over the nation of Israel, granted on ho such ones are Judges to begin with, let alone attempting to use a Prophetess of the Hebrew Old Testament to make a justification for something in the Greek New Testament, the church, is nothing more than a feeble struggle, of which can be seen here.

I did you a favor on using your own link to direct you on all information about Jael, but unlike you I do not selected a small portion, the link explains everything, not solely the analysis alone: https://obscurecharacters.com/2014/02/14/kenites-some-good-some-bad/

Other than that you've yet to show us Deborah, a Prophetess was actually taking charge here in terms of leading the fighters into battle or being in the battle itself. She can be present, yes, but actually leading and fight - unlikely. For if Shamgar, who is a Judge himself, was in a position to do so and it was mentioned in the Bible - his battle, him actually fighting, etc., why is it you cannot do the same for Deborah? Because it is unfounded, and the very fact you haven't mention Barak till now (the source itself, not you) or no mention of who his Father is speaking volume and is very telling, just as your claim of Chloe being a church leader in Corinth when the evidence amounts before you.

Read your Bible and understand it, otherwise you'll be corrected.

That being said, nothing here makes proof to claim of church leadership, mainly when speaking of Apostle Paul who was not a leader of an army, a nation and or other, he was a leader of a church, an Apostle or as some would say, a Saint.
 

20 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

"And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner."

So, Eve was deceived and became sinner. But she was not aware what happened in fact because she was deceived.

So, Adam was not deceived and not became sinner. But Adam made wrong purposely in fully conscious of the act.

At least you appear to be learning, or it may be just another ploy - one will find out eventually. Look at the references in accordance with what Apostle Paul says in regards to Creation. Mind you he addresses this to the Church before it went on it's chaos filled path, which got Chloe and her Household informing Paul, resulting in Paul giving instruction only for the church to change later on as seen in The Second Epistle to Corinthians, written by Paul in Macedonia. You can use Biblehub because it is there, I even mention such to Witness in a response to how his Pearl sees it, hen the Bible says otherwise.

To some extend, it has been address, take a look at what I said already or you can look at the biblical evidence taken from a source:  [5] Biblical Fact which is addressed above on this very page.

1 hour ago, Srecko Sostar said:

women rule over them

So, here in book of Isaiah, God has objection about woman who rule over man, but He was very satisfied with Deborah who served as military and legal leader for nation in book of Judges? Do you want suggesting something about JHVH and why he chose Deborah for leading position over all nation, over all males, elders, patriarchs? Do you have problem with that? Why would God brake his own principle about position of woman (according to some view on this matter) in Israel nation by appointing Deborah to fill an office of leader? Looks like there was no male at the moment to fill that need? I hope she wore a cover on her head  while in service. Or this also would be problem for some people?

She served as Military Leader. She served as Judge. God has not changed, as he himself claim. So, do you suggest how He made a mistake with Deborah? And decide that never again woman will be in position as judge alone, as judge with male partner or as judge above other male members?  

Or do you think that Samson, because he was male, was better Judge then Deborah?

It in regards to A Judgment Against Judah, and the references point to Jeremiah 5:31 and Habakkuk 1:4, that is, if you bothered to look at the main references, or perhaps the extension? Job 30:13, Proverbs 28:16, Eccle. 10:16, Isaiah 9:16, 19:14, 28:14, 15, Micah 3:5. 

Deborah was a Judge of the Nation of Israel, not of the church, and this goes back to Biblical Fact in which you are trying to equal that of the Old Testament when no church existed during that time. Or did you miss purposely when I address Deborah as a Prophetess?

Actually here is where you confuse the information. Prophetess Deborah was the one who gave word to Barak that God gave command him to lead an attack against the forces of the King of Ca'naan and his military commander, Sisera (Judges 4:6–7).The narrative is shown in in chapter 4 of the same book.

The one of whom Deborah spoke to was Barak, for he was a ruler of Ancient Israel as well as a military commander as seen in The Book of Judges. Barak, with Prophetess Deborah, from the Tribe of Ephraim, the prophet and 4th Judge of pre-monarchic Israel, defeated the Canaanite armies led by Sisera. For Sisera was was commander of the Canaanite army of King Jabin of Ha'zor, who is mentioned in Judges 4-5 of the Hebrew Old Testament. After being defeated by the forces of the Israelite Tribes, that of both Zebulun and Naphtali, under the command of Barak and Prophetess Deborah, Sisera was defeated and was killed by Jael, who hammered a tent peg into his temple.

The fact you didn't mention Barak is awfully silly, granted when we know of his relationship with Prophetess Deborah. Both Barak and Prophetess Deborah had a common interest, and that is: Liberating Israel from Canaanite oppression.

All males of church affilation are only mentioned in The Greek New Testament, so why even mention elders, patriarchs when in the Old Testament, as addressed before, never made any mention of churches?

Samson was a Judge himself, not a leader of a church., in fact, Samson was one of the last of the judges of the ancient Israel.

Including him [Samson] and Deborah, there is: Othniel, Ehud, Shamgar, Gideon, Abimelech, Tola, Jair, Jephthah, Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon. As far as the eye can see, none of them held leadership and or pastoral role of office inside a church, granted such didn't even exist around that time.

 

Unless you are willing to speak of a church of the Old Testament, enlighten me. For such is unfounded, and I have spoken about Deborah many times, mainly in regards of committing Spiritual Warfare and or Civil Disobedience and the fact she is listed as a hero, along with several other, in her case, aiding the military commander, Barak, to save the nation of Israel itself.

 

Here is the Claim and Response from the evidence, as stated before:

Quote

[Claim 5]: Prophetess Deborah

Most people speak of Deborah’s leadership of authority and make this a claim of which women can lead the church.

 [The Response]: As addressed in the evidence above, Prophetess Deborah was a Judge of the Nation of Israel, not a church, of which we see many churches of them solely in the Greek New Testament. Another factor is the Temples of Old, usually sons and Fathers were the ones to be of Priesthood of such, an example would be Aaron, or perhaps Samuel.

 

4 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

What you like to prove with these verse? Do you want to prove how Hierarchy in male-female religious and other principles (God told this to Adam and Eve AFTER they were been exiled from Eden) is HIS original purpose for male and female creatures? God just stated what will generally be  status and how relationships will generally look between male and female in future society that is without God, but under control of devil. Dear Mr. Space, this kind of verse is kind of "Prophecy", kind of looking in future based on circumstances and insight in human, as perfect and imperfect human. We can tell here how God have seen the future of human society and tell just one statement about that. By no means He, as God, not giving here any Command about how must look hierarchy in family, in congregation, in society. He just see what will happen from now on, as result of expelling from Paradise (or Sin, as you wish).  

It's not even my prove, it is of the Bible. I even told you, use ANY translation you want, all references for 1 Corinthians 14:34 point back to several verses, which Genesis 3:16 is included among those listed? It can easily be seen here:

• https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/14-34.htm
• https://www.openbible.info/labs/cross-references/search?q=1+Corinthians+14%3A34
• https://www.biblestudytools.com/1-corinthians/passage/?q=1-corinthians+14:34-40

Extended references point to that of the structure of the family.

I need not prove something that is already in motion, what I have only prove is what has always be and forever will be cannot be changed, for man cannot change the order of things.

Indeed, this is true, God did speak of this to Adam and Eve, but it did not stop anyone long after Adam and Eve to speak of something similar and or making a reference to it, the same can be said of Genesis 3:15, even thought you deem Abraham as selfish, this verse also is enough evidence of the Promise, in regards to the coming Prophet, known as the Christ.

That being said, have you even read the references for Genesis 3:16 itself?

That being said, it is no surprise to anyone who actually pays attention to the references in the Bible in regards to everything and or anything Apostle Paul says, like what was already addressed, God is a God of Order and what is set in motion cannot be changed, the very reason why Paul went back to Creation itself in major parts of each and every part of his work by means of his writings.

Indeed, so is verse 15, and we know that in regards to what Paul addresses, of Creation in which he put into application of the church, it is not a shock to anyone that Paul who even point to such, but apparently, it comes as a shock to you because you have proven yourself to never address any references to a verse, for instance you being in agreement now with Being One in Christ, but elsewhere you call Abraham, who was given the Promise of which is spoken of in Genesis, to be a selfish man.

And the evident mainstream attitude you profess here and all over the place shows this too, so such is already expected, as is the response.

You did show yourself to like Biblehub, how about you start using it now? Or is it the references a bit much for you, Sostar?

4 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

So as result of sin and imperfection male come to be ruler over female, generally.

Not quite. The Ancestral Original Sin did come from Adam and Eve, yes, but what Apostle Paul was conveying in a majority of his work is Creation. As stated by him, God created man first and later on, he created a woman, so there was indeed sometime in between thus making you wrong before when you stated both Adam and Eve were created at the same time. Paul, then addresses that Adam was never deceived, but the woman, Eve, had been deceived and became a transgressor, however, she will be kept safe through childbearing, provided she continues in faith, love and holiness along with soundness of mind, mind you, this was before The Church of Corinth went bonkers, as this can be seen in the First Epistle of Timothy, you know, the passage I kept pointing out that the both of you are not addressing properly. In the references it shows Paul was addressing Creation in application to the church, as well as the family, Husband, Wife, Offspring, and speaks of them in terms of roles, as he has with the church.

Other than that, your remark of imperfection contradicts what you have said some weeks ago, I will not link it because I know that will vanish, but just know that this has been said and it must be said.

4 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

You said how "some will point as well as Paul's use".  Some Bible scholars, i assume, or your friends? Who are that some? Doctors? Professors of archaeology? Who ever they are, they have their opinions with more or less accuracy. So what? Would it be first time that educated and non educated people are wrong in conclusion? You and that some point how Paul must have in mind Genesis 3:16, but Paul not give his reference to Genesis 3:16 BUT to the LAW. Very clearly written. Why you want to make me to read something that is not written in this same verse? Do i have some dyslexia or vision problems and can not see the word Law in Genesis 3:16?

Does one being educated of all things biblical and historical, offend you? I thought you people see that knowledge is power, is it not? Or perhaps one is not to know all things? I really didn't have a choice in learning about the Bible as a mere child, but I accepted it without hesitation because I knew I'd benefit and know who the True God is, and I consider that strict biblical study and teachings as well as history, as a blessing.

I know some Scholars and some Biblical Students, I know some professors also who teach about biblical history and the church, granted they are bias because on some points. How are you so sure they they are not accurate? There is a lot of people who understand the Bible who are indeed knowledgeable in this sense. Especially those who literally lived by the Bible since they were a toddler.

It is not about education, as you want to make it seem, it is about what the Bible says and only what the Bible says in accordance to the historical evidence of the scriptures, the manuscripts, the early church, and other forms of writings of the Apostolic Age. In your case, it is not about education or not, it is about clear ignorance and even with evidence placed before you, you ignore it, this isn't the first time and I will continue to profess what is indeed true because I actually take the initiative to read and research and see the true conclusion.

Well if you actually take the time to look at the references for 1 Corinthians 14:34, it should be obvious, granted when he stated the Law says so, it points to several verses, one of them including Genesis, granted Paul spoke strongly of not just the truth, but of Creation, of The Promised Seed, as well as the Family, core things of which Apostle Paul profess and even by his own students although their views have changed later on.

It is not about what is written in the same verse, it is about understanding in full context of what the verse conveys, granted that the verse in of it self even gives you the references. Like I said read and research and with what is gathered, the context is there and obvious like the sun in the sky or the grass on the ground for it is that clear.

No, the only problem you have is being cryptic, somewhat ignorant and contradicting, and at times, being in your own feelings on things because you do not see it the way the Bible speaks of such. Should I discuss with you on the likes of cursed ones in the Torah Old Testament, your feelings would obviously be expressed as you have done so before. I would not say vision either, let's not forget it was you who stated that such are of your own interpretation and or opinions of what the Bible says when the Bible is the complete opposite.

4 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

In this God's words you reading how His intention is/was  to regulate male-female relations and put male over female. But that is only your interpretation of Genesis 3:16 and nothing more. In period when all was Perfect, there is no single verse about God's plan that Adam have to control Eve. Read your Genesis chapters 1-3. Nothing about so called "theocratic order" and female place on position you suggest that exist from the Day of Creation. Counting how Adam was first and Eve was second telling nothing how God was made Adam Head of Eve. What verse in Genesis said such?

God is not a God of favoritism, he is a God of Law as well as a God of Order. In this application is is also in mankind itself for man came first and woman came after and you can even see such being expressed in both the Old and New Testament. For if God didn't have an issue with such, then surely he would not be having issues with someone being equal and or above him, which is not the case, in this same sense, God is above all persons and Spirit Beings. He is above both men and women and is above the Christ, but the application of Order in terms of God all the way to his creation remains intact, it is in the Law, it is in the church and it is in the family, that is something that is unbreakable and those who challenge it are the very ones that are in error for their ways.

This is why I stated even true Christian women would say the same thing of what I m addressing, since you brought up Buddhist in Thailand, look for a True Christian women there and discuss on the matter and see who is in the right.

That being said, anyone who tries to change is is of the mainstream and it is only being done by them for they are in the OK with women being of religious leadership when the reality is this is problematic to what was addressed by means of structure regarding God's view on things as well as the Order of which has been expressed by several, including Apostle Paul.

No one said Theocratic Order, but it is funny now that you are making words up when you realize you put yourself in a box - once again.

4 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

When talking to God, Adam did not say to God how Eve not respected him as husband and disobey what he told to her. No, he said: "The woman you put here with me"—she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it.”  This have no sound how Eve is second-class in hierarchy. She was there with him. Because God put her there and Adam was aware of that fact. 

Adam was addressing the fruit he has eaten because Eve, who had been deceived, gave Adam the fruit to eat, the only reason Adam was nervous when God question him about his nakedness. Adam, even before he ate the fruit was aware of Eve, for not only he loved her, he even spoke to God of how the animals have mates which eventually led to Eve's creation by means of Adam's rib.

Again you ignore what Apostle Paul even said. Adam was the first man and Eve was the First Woman. Adam was created first and later on, Eve was created, she was second to be created. Paul addresses Creation in regards to God's Order, Eve was the wife of Adam. This application is in the Bible itself so it is no surprise Paul brought it up, granted references tend to go way back to Genesis when he speaks of anything of the like.

4 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Adam was also aware of command about ruling, but ruling over the animals and earth only. Not over the Eve! Here is also one of the reasons why he not acting in different manner, as Head who would reject or accept the idea (so how today the JW congregation would expect him to do so)  when Eve offer him the fruit. He was not in such position, or he not thinking of himself as in such position because, we see how  his answer to God say something else -"The woman you put here with me"

You still are missing the point, and I do not know whether to be amused or baffled about such. Adam and Eve are not animals, friend, they are humans, extremely distinct from animals. Again you keep bringing up Jehovah's Witnesses when you clearly are up against biblical evidence and history, you are making yourself to be quite the comical one, but at the same time you still refuse to understand what Paul was trying to convey, and you are being ignorant of what is indeed true, just like how the truth about Chloe had been expressed not too long ago.

4 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Again, i call you politely  to show Verse from the Law about this, because Paul said in his expose how "For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says." 

Check out the links posted above and see exactly of what Paul was speaking about in terms of Creation, take a good look at 1 Timothy 2:11-14 because as of now you are making yourself out to be foolish, Sostar.

What Paul stated The Law says so, he is addressing creation and such points to several verses.

4 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Ones again, Genesis 3:16 is not part of the Law.  :))))  , on the contrary "some will point" that this is Prophecy. 

Well then Biblehub may have it in your you than, or perhaps all Biblical sources that address all cross-references be it exact and or extended. Perhaps they will quake at your exegesis of Chloe too, which is unlikely, for any man can see through that deception.

@Jack Ryan Please. Not all Muslims are like this to assume such is foolishness on your part, but it would seem I would have to educate you on their views as well, but it is likely you are among those who are in fear of them due to the whole Islamophobia thing.

10 hours ago, Jack Ryan said:

They think that their preaching means that they care. But outside of the preaching work, all they do is mock the people who disagree with them and openly say that they will all die and god will destroy them; and they can't wait! That isn't love.

Give the Congo a visit, perhaps the islands. You cannot judge a faith community as a whole for the actions of one. This is the same problem I have to teach strictly to racists who discriminate time and time again because of one's color. A guy who does a crime does not define a whole race, a man who bombs a school does not define a whole group, etc.

The mind set and mentality of the West, at times, is silly.

6 hours ago, tromboneck said:

Proper? Sure. If she can do it while cooking, cleaning and pregnant and barefooted at the same time

Unfortunately his aim is to use the information from Pearl, which was not the first time, to address religious leadership, not realizing facts in regards to the church's history outs weights the claim. Moreover, some of the verses he had address do not even match up with references and or context, of which I pointed out in regards to an ill use of such, which has been addressed in Biblical Fact 5 above,for this fact originates from a message taken from a message some years ago.

20 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

??? interesting name (Old Card) for bible verse and Bible book inspired by Spirit. Isn't whole Bible one context, not only one chapter or one book, or one Letter. Someone pushing this verse, someone pushing other verse. How can that be wrong? :)))

The Galatians 3:28 Card as is said in regards to those who attempt to defend religious leadership of women in the church. This verse has been brought up time and time again for decades and every time this claim, this little card that is under the sleeves of those who believe such are proven wrong.

We even see here that Witness and you fill the bill here and the both of you refuse to to see that, hence the response the both of you gave. What we all can agree with here is yes the verse speaks of being one in Christ, however, this verse has nothing to do with religious leadership, and using this verse, as many man many have done before the both of you, to make a stance on the changing of the church's structure, is the very thing Paul addresses the church to avoid in the Galatians chapter 1. Therefore, using this verse to make such a stance is silly when we see this passage speaks the very thing is is focused on.

But is is odd for you to be mentioning this verse when we have already seen you speak ill of Abraham, calling him selfish without even understanding of why he did what he did, mind you, this is coming from the same guy [you] who have alluded to before God has no issue, not being surprised with males or females changing their sex or the very fact God would have done something else if Abraham was left for dead. Come on now, Sostar, and I won't even link that information too because I know it will vanish the following day.

Now, as you can see I will not link your response, I will quote you because sometimes when I do link something it is gone the next day.

Anyways, the claims match up with what both you and Witness had said about the verse, and the facts of the response from actual sources says otherwise, so no, calling it an opinion will not help you here.

Sostar stated: This same Paul here said very advanced and almost innovative thought. He abolishes all the social divisions that are characteristic of the society in which they lives. I primarily think of Jewish society and religion as an indivisible part of the Jew people. Eliminates the difference on the basis of nationality. Eliminates the difference of status on a social scale caused by position or origin in society. Eliminates differences caused by belonging to sex, gender. (It not surprised if some talking how First Christians was the Religious Communist with the ideas of a classless, egalitarian society that shared their land and their other property and similar.)

There was nothing about social divisions whatsoever. Galatians had both the Jews and the Gentiles who both believed in the same thing, and at the time because of their differences they were not normally keen on someone not of their own being with them. This barrier has been broken because of them being One in Christ. It does not matter the sex, age, background, old, young, etc. They, are one in Christ for their is neither male or female,for they are the sharers of Abraham's Seed, that same seed you spoke of in regards of Abraham being selfish, hen you have been corrected when we can clearly see Abraham was not selfish and he did what he did for the Promise of what God said to him.

Hence why I said before to you, no Abraham, no Seed. No Seed, God's Promise is the very first among what he spoke of to be broken, thus shattering all foretellings of what is to come for nothing would have taken place in Bethlehem.

Unlike you, I don't see Abraham as a selfish man, and because of this, I totally agree with Apostle Paul in terms of Salvation, but seeing how Witness is egging you on here, I guess one could say the both of you may see him as such, but have the audacity to speak of Jesus in a good light.

All in all, Galatians 3:28 has nothing to do with religious leadership or authority regarding women, it is not even talking about men here either, it simply points to and makes a strong indication, in true context of Salvation, for being saved by means of Salvation means being One in Christ, in Union with the Christ and in turn The Christ is the only way to the Father, YHWH God who is the true El Shaddai.

Granted of how Witness agrees with you, let alone the chapter, that is enough proof there to even show you of what the passage as a whole in context is conveying here.

I will do you a favor and post it for you as with the title of where the verse is located under:

[The Law and the Promise] >>>> HERE

Visual for C/P: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+3&version=ESV

20 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

That is your understanding. They have (congregation) some kind of "inspired chaos". Paul in the beginning of chapter preferred more if some have gift of prophesies then gift of speaking language. But both gift are gifts of spirit and no one of those who was "inspired" (male or female) can not chooses what they personally like more and tell their wishes to Spirit and after heard the personal wish of person, Spirit change his mind and decide to give some other gift to that person. It is possible, but this comment is only for discussion about possibility here.   

Not really, the response came from actual facts, not of opinion and or other. Inspired Chaos and as to what makes you want to bring this up and not have anything say to back up such claim?

In the Church of Corinth, there were things that were deemed problematic, which resulted in Apostle Paul writing a letter to them to build them up so they do things accordingly, in fact, the very history of the chaos going on in the Church of Corinth can be read, and yes, historical facts, something you cannot grasp that easily even when it is presented to you in your face. If you have not noticed, I spoke of the very subject in the chapter's passage itself: Orderly Worship, and because of what can be read and the references that is directly pointing to it, historical facts gave this title of the church: The Troubled Church. But what to expect from a man who is shown to be lacking in biblical and church history? What to even say of a man who is given the information, but simply ignores it? Because such a man does not want to be seen as wrong.

Now, it is already know that when Apostle Paul was  in Ephesus, he had learned about the problems that came about in the new church in Corinthians and because of this, he wrote this letter to instruct them on how to deal with these problems. Even in today's day and age, the church continue to face many of these same problems, many centuries after Apostle Paul wrote this letter and this is the very reason why when instruction is to be used in disciplinary action, this passage is often used to correct the wrongs that rise among the church itself.

If you truly do not have any idea of why Apostle Paul was instructing the Church of Corinth, I suggest you take a good read at every cross-reference in this chapter from start to finish, or simply read from chapter 12 to 14 and there you will see the context in full, as in, The church was taught and they listen, but over time they have succumb to division and badness,jealously and abusing of the gifts, and when this had be discovered, this prompt Paul to speak to instruct those in Corinth to cease the chaos going about in the church of which is deemed problematic. Only later on we see that Apostle Paul's instruction has been accepted and the church actually made the attempt when being accepting of Paul's critical instruction.

The question is, how in Lord's name did you miss that?

For if you actually took the time to read both First and Second Epistles, you'd realized that, the shock here is your friend didn't point that out to you in regards to the Church of Corinth. This information is elementary, for even the most novice of Theologians can see this for themselves.

No, there is no possibility, because anyone can see of such ones in the church abusing the gifts, causing division, influence of sin, prideful behavior and a list of other things, this is why anyone bringing up facts in regards to The Church of Corinth will state that the Church is Troubled, Chaos filled, Divided, Problematic, and or in need of being disciplined and or instructed.

If sin is among the people, or ill practices regarding abusing the gifts, it is obvious Apostle Paul will respond, for there was a reason behind this letter.

20 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

About your interpretation how "to be silence" is applied to the male also, not only for female. But CONTEXT is here:

  27 If any speak in a tongue, let there be only two or at most three, and each in turn, and let someone interpret. 28 But if there is no one to interpret, let each of them keep silent in church and speak to himself and to God. 

These are merely facts from a source. I never stated anywhere that a women is to be 100% silent in a church whatsoever. The women in Corinth were silent due to the very fact a majority of them were taking part in those among the divided doing bad practices in the church, for if you had read the Epistles of Paul, you'd realize that. If I recall, it was only you who spoke of silence in a literal sense, for what I stree is that religious leadership is something that a women should not do because it goes in accordance with what Paul brought up in terms of reason. Witness called it an opinion, but the cross-references to Paul's statement says otherwise.

20 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Only reason for KEEP SILENT is lack of INTERPRETER! (and this advice is only about if person have gift of speaking tongues) And according to Paul, even 2-3 person can speak in the same time.

Little Srecko, little Screko, allow me to correct you because like that of a child who has never been disciplined, you continue to dwell on something that is clearly not in the right. You do not see what this verse conveys and this small claim of yours shows it.

We already know about what took place in Pentecost, the gifts, and one among these gifts enabled Jews coming from more than a dozen different lands to hear God's Word in  a language of their own as seen in Acts 2:4-11. We later see that such was used for the Edification of the Church. That is why Apostle Paul stressed that no one should speak in a strange tongue, but rather, have an interpreter [to "him" the glossolalist] be present so that all could benefit from it, otherwise, the man is to be silent, hence the very connection to 1 Cor. 14:28. If that isn't enough for you, simply look the verse in biblehub, pick any translation, since you tend to go for many colorful flavors that ails you, as you have done in the past.

This also furthermore the point from the very fact itself, hence why it can be said the church in Corinth was indeed problematic, and so, instruction was given by Paul.

And what of 1 Corinthians 14:27 (14:5) and 29 (Acts 13:1)? The reason why men are to be silence in Corinth is already known, granted you never gave the context as to why this is, it is safe to say not even you understood it at first yourself, mainly with some of the comments you have made on this topic alone. Other than that, why care for these 2 verses now when you ignored them before?

20 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Is that also something that is happening in congregation today? Are JW restoration have in program of meetings that 2-3 person speaking aloud in the same time. They should have if want be as it was first church in Corinth :)))  no matter if they today not speaks in tongues,  but if they want they can on International Conventions. :))

Like I told you before, the Jehovah's Witnesses or the Watchtower cannot say you here, and you only proven yourself to be incorrect, granted that anyone even to Theologians know the history of Restorationist.

for last I recall, and according to the very history of the Apostolic age and EVERY Christian that came from the Great Awakening who are Restorationist, do not influence sin, they do not go about causing a division in the church for ill means, granted that they do not follow the Creed,but rather, that of the Apostolic Age and a whole list of other things.

I instructed you on the Apostolic Age before and here we see you bring up Restrationist when you have no idea of the history.

I can give you a hint though, those of the Apostolic Age are in connection with one church, nothing in regards to the Galatians, or the Corinthians, granted they all share the same beliefs, but there is a very famous passage regarding the church built 2,000 years ago. I leave that with you as homework because you have failed several times before, even with a historical information given to you several times before, hence, the original church did not begin in Corinth, for Corinth was just an extension of that.

Other than that, this puts what Gone Away had spoken of you elsewhere, as in comparing with your statement on this response and what you said on the previous page, seems kind of convoluted in a ploy to attempt something that is unknown to us, but known to you. The instruction Paul profess to the Corinth is used, however, anyone who knows the history of where they trace themselves back to.

But I do invite you to speak on apostolic succession on another occasion, apparently it is not the time and place here for such.

20 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

On the contrary advice  for the woman is this:  

34) the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. (35) If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.

And? Your point?

20 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

But what if Paul here using some other people idea of "silence"? What if this 2 verses is not HIS ADVICE how woman should behave in the church? But what if Paul only quoted (using same words, idea) that was came from some other people in this congregation? 

Actually, since Apostle Paul was addressing the Church of Corinth after discovering of what is taking place, he was saying exactly what he met here.

There is no 2 different silence and or any idea of silence, so don't make such a claim of which you cannot back up. The Strong's pretty much tells you in this regard: https://biblehub.com/greek/4601.htm

It is a G 4601 by the way.

He speaks of the women being silent here due to the very issues deemed problematic taking place in the Church of Corinth, as I have said before, there is the facts, which are true, an the evidence, which are also true, of which you can even find and read in the Bible - that is, if you want to bird your way out of this one, I would not really be surprised, as you have done countless times.

Granted he is writing a letter to discipline and instruct, advising them to build themselves up and backing away from mixing what they did practice with what is bad, then yes. I would not call it his own advice, you are not a Sunni Muslim, so do not make that claim, but rather him being the very one to speak far more in tongues than the people of Corinth, having more experience and the like, the very one who has the Spirit that has been poured to him, is instructing the church.

20 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Verse 36 say:  36 Or did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only ones it has reached? 

Perhaps this people, leaders, elders? or whatever they have been, are addressed with this verse 36. What if Paul said; "You brothers as elders, in position of leaders of this congregation put command that woman can not participate in congregational activity, that they can not speak, ask questions, give own interpretation and understanding, asking why this why that .... And because of your view of woman in generally as second-class members, you put a regulation how all woman must be in silent while on meeting. Because of that I, Paul,  am asking you - Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only ones it has reached?"   

And? And what is the point you are trying to make by stopping at just 36? Continue reading, Sostar.

Apostle Paul was addressing those among the divided who were doing what they were not suppose to be doing. Also the following verses even addresses the conclusion to solidified what Paul is conveying regarding the church.

20 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

NEXT: 34) the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.

Please tell us WHAT LAW says also that Woman must be in silence in Congregational meetings? About what Law Paul has talking? Law of Moses or some other Law? What verse in Law of Moses? What verse in some other Law? Rabbinic Law, Roman Law, Greek Law?

Once again, the immediate context is about Orderly Worship, in regards to the Church of Corinth, for nowhere it is stated of any church but the only the one being focused here, the one in Corinth of which Paul sent word of instruction.

As for the Law, in Paul's response to the Corinthians by means of a letter, he is referencing to the teaching of which is even suggested by Scholars in regards to The Genesis Creation narratives when he had this in mind, with the implications for Order and propriety in relationships between men and women. Furthermore, in what Paul had profess points to several verses, granted that Paul is the type to speak in direct of scripture as he have in his other writings. Genesis 3:16 being one some will point to as well as Paul's use of general terms the law includes Isaiah 3:12 or other similar principles in connection with what he had said, this is the same cause that can be said of Simon Peter who did somewhat of the same thing, hence that the role of submission of wives to husbands and the general male leadership role principles are moral laws of God’s nature (or God's Purpose and Will,as well as Order), which cannot be changed. Other verses that pertain to verse 34 alone in regards to "as the Law also says", according to Paul:1 Corinthians 11:5, 15, 14:21, 35, Ephesians 5:22, 1 Timothy 2:11, 12, 1 Peter 3:1. Scholarly info is also a suggested read, should you choose to.

Now, when some in the church had a message by means of teaching to give to the church it was a word of prophecy in public. Any situation some such message was given it had to be tested and evaluated against Scripture to make sure that it was valid and true. When it was validated it would be considered authoritative and in a sense binding to those who heard it.

The Bible explains in several places are marriages are to work in loving submission to each-other, but with the husband having the responsibility of headship, furthermore, while a husband may consult his wife and reach a decision together, ultimately he has the burden of being responsible for the final choices made.

In this context of this particular church, this means that men have the responsibility of evaluating, approving and delivering teaching to the whole body - once again, of what the focus is, religious leadership of authority within the church, priestly office, etc. Since women do cannot have such authoritative responsibility, they are asked not to be the ones voicing concerns or pronouncing judgement when certain matters arise. One has to take into account that Apostle Paul did not restrict women from praying or even prophesying publicly themselves as seen in 1 Corinthians 11:5 and Acts 2:17. This is purely an issue of headship and authority, which the Law also spoke to rather than an edict against speaking in a church and participating in other ways.

Some women are still bounded by such restrictions, for this would primarily be the father who is responsible for daughters until they are given over to a husband, but a brother or other family relation could play a similar role.

So it is no surprise Apostle Paul said what he said to the women in Corinth.

But here we see you speaking as if you think he is addressing all churches when we see him speaking about only one in this regard.

20 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Divisions in the Church

10 I appeal to you, brothers,1 by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no pdivisions among you, but that you be united qin the same mind and the same judgment. 11 For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there is rquarreling among you, my brothers. 12 What I mean is that seach one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow tApollos,” or “I follow uCephas,” or “I follow Christ.” 

And? You think a guy who has read every account on women of the bible would not have known about Chloe? Everyone knows who she is, and she is only address once - literally. And she is addressed in 1 Corinthians 1:11.

20 hours ago, 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. 

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.

"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God."

The irony is that the other guy didn't point this out, he agreed with your words every step of the way.

• Other than that let's stick with this claim of yours, Sostar: 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. 
• The Truth: The name appears only once in the New Testament, in 1 Corinthians 1:11 in the context of "the house of Chloe".
• The Truth:  Chloe is only mention once and not even spoken of as a religious leader, as you claim > https://biblehub.com/greek/5514.htm

That being said, I advise you to go read, learn, and put into application in anything and everything regarding The First Epistle to the Corinthians, written by Apostle Paul

https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Letter-of-Paul-to-the-Corinthians

You are going to need it, Srecko Sostar.

20 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

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

Read for the truth, man. Because you are obviously showing right now, and even before that you have no idea what is going on here. And that being said, nothing you have proven here in terms of religious leadership is even sound or clear, it is the opposite, cryptic and clearly not understanding of what even you yourself have said, hence the flaws.

Read up on the facts because those are solidified facts from the last comment, clearly such is not even in your league right now because you are still far from what the Bible says on many accounts, not just this one.

Click on those that are listed and go about doing the research, you have tools such as YouTube and Goggle and it has not stopped you before, why is it stopping you at this very moment? All in all,  perhaps you will learn something, but it is unlikely because you will respond in a way to be corrected, but hey, if a man loves to be corrected every time, so be it, this is not the first time I have discussed such a topic and or entered into one.

I will leave it as this should anyone say otherwise when clearly such ones are at fault because it seems people do not understand what the Bible says on this matter, or just either confused and or ignorant, for such people think they could get away with the very cake they made and attempt to eat it too, but be assured, that cake will be slapped out of their greased hands before even the frosting touches their lips - a waste yes, but they must learn to lay off the sweets that will only hinder them in the long run.

Does the Bible allow women to serve as senior pastors over a

congregation or is this a role that is reserved only for men?

What people tend to do:

They are very appealing to culture regarding women who are leading in areas of politics or on the job and the corporate space and all sorts of other places in today's current culture, what they fail to see of which is indeed a danger equally such to the church in terms of leadership and authority, not taking into account of what the Bible has to say.

They're also open to and appeal towards experience, for some will say their pastor is a woman of religious leadership, pours on to them and they say she has the gift of pastoring and preaching way better than most of the men that they know The danger here is that experience, which stems from the mainstream and New Aged ones, is not always consistent with what the Bible has to say.

Some Facts about Women in the Bible:

[1] Biblical Fact

Women have and always will play an extremely significant role in advancing God’s Kingdom and there are several examples of this in the Greek New Testament.

[A]

Although already addressed, it will be very brief: Priscilla along with her husband Aquila taking aside a man named Apollos, traveling evangelists at the time and correcting his theology in teaching him sound and correct Biblical Doctrine.

 

We see in The Gospel of Luke 8:2, 3 that Jesus himself mentioned several women that supported him greatly in the ministry.

[C]

Apostle Paul in Romans chapter 16:1-16 listed about 16 people and about 10 of them at least were women who strongly supported him in his ministry in addition to what can be read in Acts 21 (brief since it has been mentioned), we see that Philip had four unmarried daughters all of whom were prophesying or speaking forth the Word of God, as well as in 1 Corinthians 11:5, Apostle Paul allows and even encourages women to pray and to prophesy publicly and or speak in the church for these reasons and others.

Some will attempt to make a very strong case for women being able to speak or preach or share or whatever you want to call it,  publicly in the church, but they fail miserably to assume that a women who do such things can and or are able to be religious leaders of authority within the church when such has not been expressed by even the women in the Bible.

[2] Biblical Fact

Within the church, two different roles does not diminishing of one's value whatsoever. In the Scriptures, it is very clear that God is a God of Order, in other words, God has set up certain orders in the home (The Structure of the Family), and He has set up certain orders in church (The Structure of the Church).

We look at the home, the family, for there is clearly a distinction between men's role as a husband and also the woman's role as a wife but this does not in any way shape or form make the woman less important than the man just because she serves in a different role, function, and or capacity - we also we look at God the Father, for we know below him is Jesus and the Angels and they submit to God and we know, how in subjection, they function.

The Bible supports that not just women but people in general have a different role different function, mainly when we take into account the church but in no way because they have a different role or different gifts or whatever does not equal to that of diminishing of one’s value in their contribution to the ministry, of which is a core component to the church itself, practiced by those in the Spiritual House.

[3] Biblical Fact

There are no known women pastors in the Greek New Testament. Period. We do not see any examples of women leading, overseeing, and or shepherding a flock of people, having authority of leadership in the church.

Some people will make attempt to go jump all the way back to the Hebrew Old Testament and bring up Prophetess Miriam or Deborah. This is where we must be very careful and clearly those who think otherwise are not doing the best of being cautious and being revealed to be twisting Scripture in regards to their own feelings and opinions. They fail in this sense because they do not know and or remain totally ignorant, for instance, let’s focus on Prophetess Deborah, she was she was a Judge over The Nation of Israel, not a pastor or religious leader of authority over church, locally or not, therefore we should not being attempt to use Prophetess Deborah in order to push an accursed practice or tradition of women leadership within and over a church.

For people like this will try to use an example from the Hebrew Old Testament to try to prove something that's going on in the Greek New Testament regarding the church, this kind of action is to what some will say this is a Biblical Violation and those who say that have every strong reason to say such because it is true. In the Hebrew Old Testament, God was dealing specifically with the Nation of Israel, we do not want to look at the Nation of Israel, for we want to look at how God is setting up the church in terms of leadership as seen in the Greek New Testament regarding the church.

[4] Biblical Fact

The Messiah/Christ, Jesus, selected only men to serve as his Apostles and or to establish the leadership of the Greek New Testament church, for it is said by some that by means of God's perfect Will, men take the leadership role of overseeing the local church. Apostle Paul, of whom addressed the roles of religious position by those of authority also referred to each role in identification of one who is a male (man) - of which will be addressed below.

[5] Biblical Fact

There are passages of Scripture in the Greek New Testament that suggest that the role of higher and or senior pastor is reserved primarily for men for instance 1 Timothy 3 gives the qualifications of anyone who wants to be an overseer or an elder or a pastor of a church so when you look at 1 Timothy chapter 3, it is very clear that as you go through that chapter itself, Apostle Paul, as is briefly mentioned in Biblical Fact 4, is using specifically and exclusively the Male Pronoun.

Qualifications for Overseers

[1] The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. [2] Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, [3] not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. [4] He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, [5] for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God's church? [6] He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. [7] Moreover, he must be well thought of by outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, into a snare of the devil.

And so this passage in and of itself suggest that God has reserved the role of religious leadership of authority, in this case a higher and or senior pastor, once again, specifically for men.

Within the same point the passage, the most strongest passage in this regard in the entirety of the Greek New Testament is 1 Timothy 2:11-14. I have already made mention to this passage in full context, clearly one that is being ignored here because it is a very strong one, as it is with anyone who speaks on this subject.

For it reads:

• 1 Timothy 2:11-14 – (11) Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. (12) I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet. (13) For Adam was formed first, then Eve; (14) and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor.

Some will say this is of Paul's own opinion, that he Paul a distinction between his own opinion, and one derived from God's Holy Spirit and they will bring up 1 Corinthians 7:6, 25, and 40 as seen in page 1 of this thread. As we can see here, Paul in this passage above was not speaking of The Unmarried and the Widowed in this passage, nor was he speaking about Principles of Marriage for everything mentioned in the verse above (1 Timothy 2:11-14), not of which not even in connection with the verse in Timoty, the actual references will be mentioned below in Green:

• 1 Corinthians 11:8, 14:34
• 1 Tim. 2:10
• Titus 2:3-5
• Genesis 2:7, 22, 3:6, 13, 16, 20
• 2 Corinthians 11:3

I invite anyone who reads to look at the cross-references for themselves to see the verses mention are indeed true to this passage vs. those who make the claim such is an opinion of Paul when everything he has said in 1 Timothy 12:11-14 has a reason and it points to one thing.

Now, in terms of church leadership, Apostle Paul goes back to Creation (hence the mention of Adam and Eve), for he is in no way shape or form speaking of anything of culture, or as we can see nothing in terms of widows and or marriages, for we know that Paul was the one to be direct and specific with the churches in his Epistles/Letters.

Apostle Paul goes back to Creation because it is something that always was and always will be, Apostle Paul states that a man was created first and the woman was created second; to be a helpmate/helper for the man. Due to this, it has led people to believe that because Apostle Paul does go all the way back to Creation because this is God's Order, that this is God's Will for leadership within the Greek New Testament church.

Finally there's another, and yet, passive Scripture in this regard, 1 Corinthians 14:34, 35

(34) the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. (35) If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.

of which Apostle Paul was dealing with a very problematic issue going on in the City of Corinth,of which will be address all the way down below.

[6] Biblical Fact

Women can possess The Spiritual Gift of teaching, shepherding, ministering , prophesying publicly, etc. without necessarily serving in any religious leadership of authority. She may have the Spiritual Gift of being able to oversee to lead to shepherd to rebuke to hold people accountable to care for a group of people but not necessarily being called to lead a group of men or an entire church, for instance she may feel the calling to shepherd or prophesy publicly to, minister to others, perhaps women's group or ministering to children and or youth, or some other type of ministry where she is able to speak Wisdom into people's lives even on a greater level than a man could ever do. It is also possible that a woman could possess a stronger Gift of speaking, preaching and pastoring than a man can, of which no one is making an absurd argument against in which women do many things way better than men do, for in respects to context, the Bible encourages women to use these particular Gifts. and women do take examples of which can be found in passages like Proverbs 31:10-31.

Some Common Objections regarding

leadership roles of authority among other things

 [Claim 1]: No Education, No Leadership

People will make the claim that women are not permitted to be religious leaders of authority because in The Greek New Testament women were not educated enough to be religious leaders.

[The Response]: The issue with that is that nowhere in the Greek New Testament does it suggest or even stresses such regarding education as a prerequisite for people being able to serve in a particular role in the church. For if some want to make such a claim, they will also have to speak on behalf of others, even men, such as the Disciples, and others, who had followed Jesus, all and each on their level of intelligence and expertise differ from one another. It is easy to point one who speaks deceit in their claim in this regard.

[Claim 2]: Those pushing the old Galatians 3:28 Card

People will point to Galatians 3:28 which reads:

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

They will continue, even argue that this is legitimate proof that there is no distinction anymore between men and women, for men should be able to do everything women can do and women should be able to everything that men can do, vice versa as with other things deemed unfounded.

[The Response]: These types of people take that Scripture, Galatians 3:28, way out of context. And as to what is the actual, the true context that puts the false one to shame? It is very simple, so simple even a child is able to comprehend the truth out of the very lie professed by others. The actual and true, solidified context of this passage is talking about: Salvation (hence Being One In [or In Union with] Christ). For in terms of Salvation, or rather Being One or In Union with Christ -  race, sex, free or slave,, young, old, whatever, etc. being one with Christ indicates that both men and women can be saved for Salvation is for the both of them, as is of mankind who accepts what is true.

In regards to the time of Paul, Greeks can be saved, slaves can be saved, Jews can be saved, etc. there is no distinction between who can come to a relationship with Jesus Christ and in turn, with God the Father.

So, this verse, Galatians 3:28, is not talking in any way shape or form about church leadership authority whatsoever.

[Claim 3]: Women Prophesying

People will make the claim that women are spoken of to have been prophesying, in an attempt to make it seem as though because they can do as such, they can be leaders in the church.

[The Response]: The true of the matter is any references to men or women prophesying, especially in regards to EVERYTHING written by Apostle Paul, it points back to speaking publicly, granted of which took place immediately after Pentecost: preaching the gospel, speaking of God’s Kingdom, talk about the Messianic Age of Christ returning (very reason why today’s Samaritans and several others wait for Him to return). All of what has taken place all equating to the Great Commission itself, and eventually there will be a time of ceasing the spreading of the gospel, and the End will most indeed come.

More information can be found here: https://biblehub.com/greek/4395.htm

[Claim 4]: The Times have changed, the people have changed, and the church must change.

[The Response]: The thing is, you cannot change the church. It is one thing for the church to learn and adapt as well as apply as they progress, but the core functions of the church cannot be touched. As we speak, the mainstream is doing the opposite and a whole lot of things even to the point where levels of inappropriate behavior and clothing are allowed in the church. All and all, such ones are very open and accepting of religious leaders and pastors who are indeed women, the factor of the matter is such ones put into application of their view of the church rather than the Bible itself.

[Claim 5]: Prophetess Deborah

Most people speak of Deborah’s leadership of authority and make this a claim of which women can lead the church.

 [The Response]: As addressed in the evidence above, Prophetess Deborah was a Judge of the Nation of Israel, not a church, of which we see many churches of them solely in the Greek New Testament. Another factor is the Temples of Old, usually sons and Fathers were the ones to be of Priesthood of such, an example would be Aaron, or perhaps Samuel.

[Claim 6]: Being Silent

Most people among the most extreme believe that a women should not speak at all and they should keep silent entirely inside the church, using Apostle Paul’s words for the wrong reasons.

Others will push the idea that this passage does not exist, but these same people never read a manuscript or two that defeats their claim.

Other know this passage is there and pretends it does not exist and or they lack to see what Paul was addressing in Corinth.

Others will direct this verse for women only, granted it does speak of them, but several verses back it also speaks of men to be silent also - again, Paul was trying to instruct and buildup The Church of Corinth for they were dealing with a great deal of problems.

[The Response]: The passage in question does indeed say women should be silent, however, if anyone understood the context of this passage, they’d realize that it is due to disorderly conduct that was taking place in The Church of Corinth. Those in Corinth succumb to conduct that is not Christian like. The Church of Corinth had chaos and lack of order, and such was running rampant within the confines of the church, hence verse 33. Everyone in the church was participating with whatever expression they desired, whenever they desired, as loudly as they desired. Those with the Gift of Tongues were speaking simultaneously, and no one was concerned with interpreting what was being said. Those with a revelation from God were shouting out randomly, even if what was said could not be heard above, and apparently no one was evaluating what was being offered as prophecy. The church meetings were not appealing for the main stage of what is going on is utter chaos, and no one was being instructed as if it is like a kindergarten class with no teacher and or any supervisor, moreover, we see examples of what is going on in verses 5, 12, and 19. Apostle Paul had a solution, he instructs a number of people to be silent at a certain time and under certain conditions and speaks in a way to buildup the church (1 Corinthians 14:27-28a, 29-31a, 34-35). So it is absurd for any man to use and twist a passage for gain, mainly this one in an attempt to totally silence women in the church when no chaotic conduct is being done by them in the church.

That being said, those who think otherwise need to learn and actually pay attention to what the small letters in the Bible actually points to, for they are there for a reason. For it is easy for one to have the mindset of the mainstream and think they can get away with speaking of things that is entirely different as to what the Bible says, and such ones have to learn what putting context is, you cannot mix bad milk with good milk.

@Srecko Sostar Granted we are talking about Prophetess, this is unrelated. What I can say, for someone who has visited Thailand several times, monks indeed take up Alms, but since the change of the times, they take and receive other things, especially the ones you find in Maha Sarakham.

1 hour ago, Gone Away said:

It could cost your life.....actually worth a lot more....even if you don't agree!!

At times it can cost anything. Pour encercler un homme assez longtemps, l'opprimer et le faire souffrir, il finira par se défendre par tous les moyens. meaning if you corner a man long enough, to oppress him and make him suffer, he will end up defending himself by all means.

Christians will and always will subjection themselves to Spiritual Warfare and or Civil Disobedience, which at times even when faced with and or in subjection to grave injury and or possibly death. Even with such intense situations what remains intact is one thing, their belief in what is true.

A Real Christians would never crack under pressure, but you'd be surprised of those who claim to be True Christians break like an egg being tossed into the street.

The crazy thing is a lot of people in the realm of religion do not know what is going on, for there are things not many people know of what is going, hence the type of stuff I tend to dwell in. All I can say things will get worse, with a price tag attached to it.