JW Insider

I'm guessing that this "fact" probably came from a fake news source. The LGBT community, as far as I can tell, is vehemently against anything that would harm its social and political momentum. I have heard an interview where spokespersons for this community have explicitly condemned Pedophilia. Where one does find a P suffixed to the acronym, it is supposed to mean "pansexual" described on mtv.co.uk as: "When someone is pansexual it means they are attracted to people regardless of their gender. They are attracted to individuals rather than one particular gender or sexuality, and that can be whomever they fancy." Just like all the other letters in their alphabet soup, none of their definitions would apply specifically to anyone prior to the age of consent. Defining "consent" is another problem, even in the judicial matters of Jehovah's Witnesses.
Edited to double-check my guess above: I don't always trust snopes.com unless their research is well-documented, but this article appears to have researched the topic:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/lgbtp-adding-letter/
Is ‘LGBT’ Adding a ‘P’ for Pedosexuals? Claims that the LGBT community is adding a "P" to represent "pedosexuals" originated with a homophobic smear campaign.

I think that's very doubtful, unless you think that measuring abuse by all JW congregation members equates to just measuring only the priests and responsible officials of these Catholic diocese. Also, this is just Pennsylvania. You would need to add those reports from Massachusetts (made public in 2002 was it?) and several other states to get a parity population of Catholics here that matches that of the (JW) numbers from Australia.
I'm not saying we don't also have a serious problem that most Witnesses know very little about or can't acknowledge. I just don't think you can so easily make a true comparison from these separate "snapshots" of reports/studies. They cover different statistical "populations."
One thing in the report I found disturbing is that this was based on church records that detailed the crimes, but also detailed systemic cover-ups and even the promotion of priests and church officials involved in the cover-up. This went all the way up to cardinals and arch-bishops, ultimately even the Vatican.
The fight over statute of limitations laws that always comes up as an issue after these reports also tends to become embroiled in its own coverup on the political side. Although anti-Catholicism is common, there are often enough US politicians in high places who fight the change to statute of limitations laws because they are convinced that extending the prosecution window truly would bankrupt the Catholic Church. Governor Brown in California and Governor Cuomo in New York have been rumored to accept that "line" from the Catholic Church. But keeping these laws in effect, knowing the typical way in which abused children wait until they are adults before gaining the courage to face this publicly, these laws help produce a coverup of the number of cases that would otherwise be reported.

I think that's very doubtful, unless you think that measuring abuse by all JW congregation members equates to just measuring only the priests and responsible officials of these Catholic diocese. Also, this is just Pennsylvania. You would need to add those reports from Massachusetts (made public in 2002 was it?) and several other states to get a parity population of Catholics here that matches that of the (JW) numbers from Australia.
I'm not saying we don't also have a serious problem that most Witnesses know very little about or can't acknowledge. I just don't think you can so easily make a true comparison from these separate "snapshots" of reports/studies. They cover different statistical "populations."
One thing in the report I found disturbing is that this was based on church records that detailed the crimes, but also detailed systemic cover-ups and even the promotion of priests and church officials involved in the cover-up. This went all the way up to cardinals and arch-bishops, ultimately even the Vatican.
The fight over statute of limitations laws that always comes up as an issue after these reports also tends to become embroiled in its own coverup on the political side. Although anti-Catholicism is common, there are often enough US politicians in high places who fight the change to statute of limitations laws because they are convinced that extending the prosecution window truly would bankrupt the Catholic Church. Governor Brown in California and Governor Cuomo in New York have been rumored to accept that "line" from the Catholic Church. But keeping these laws in effect, knowing the typical way in which abused children wait until they are adults before gaining the courage to face this publicly, these laws help produce a coverup of the number of cases that would otherwise be reported.

There is virtually no Wahabbism in Iran except among the few remaining ISIS supporters and some Sunni extremist terrorists. Saudi Arabia would love to export more of it, but most Muslims hate it. So far, their society wouldn't allow it from the perspective of the government. It's true that the overwhelming majority of Iranian society is rural, conservative, but that is apparently what they want. Iran is still a freer society than the Arabian peninsula. Iran is not strict about the burka (or even lesser coverings for women) where it is still consider extreme and too piously self-righteous. Women are often a part of the government in Iran and the social hierarchy. Iranian women can still visit their conservative grandparents in the country wearing the headscarfs and then go visit their cousins in Lebanon on the weekend and wear a bikini.
Both Syria and Iran have been, even very recently, some of the more free countries in the Middle East. Iran is an Islamic Republic, but it's a "kind of democracy" but with a theocratic layer of government that acts like a very conservative "supreme court" that can block laws in the name of religion. They, the mullahs, are also corrupt, trying to control capitalist endeavors. But it is not illegal to be a Christian or Jew in Iran. By comparison there is nothing like democracy in Saudi Arabia, UAE, etc. Human rights violations are not as much of a problem in Iran as they are in say, Israel and Saudi Arabia.

Hmmmm... I thought the Governing Body was supposed to be faithful and discrete slaves .....   ministering to ..... to the brotherhood.
The IDEA of providing " food at the proper time" is not to spiritually feed God ... it is supposed to feed the Brotherhood ... QUALITY food at the proper time.
WHOLESOME food at the proper time.
We seem to have, with BLIND respect for the Governing Body,  evolved into an idolatrous situation, divorced from common sense reality.

This puts it in a nutshell and is overall perceptive and appreciative of the work of others. The reason that nobody knows anything today is because at the first misstep it is 'OFF WITH HIS HEAD!' leaving only inexperienced clods to run the show.
There are new battle lines being drawn today, and they have to do with human authority. The trend today is to despise it in every setting, not just JW. It is also one of the trademarks of the 'apostates' discussed in Jude and 2 Peter.
We have overall largely fought and won the battle of 'is there a Trinity?', blood transfusion, military non-participation, from the standpoint of nuetral observers. With determined opposers they will never be won, and each new 'weapon formed against you that will not succeed' will for them forever be a grand slam home run, but this is not where one must look. One must look at impartial parties.
Today it is largely 'apostates' who are succeeding in doing what Jehovah's Witnesses could never do on their own: putting Jehovah's name at the center of all creation.' In Russia it is anti-cult. In the West it is anti-cult and child abuse accusations. None of the reports are groundless, but they are all misframed and misrepresented. The trick will be to frame and represent them properly.
Amidst some of these accusations, Bethel seems to me to resemble 'a deer caught in the headlights' but it has shown many times in the past that it can adapt quickly. Sometimes I think that the lightning-like chariot image is applied too hastily, but then other times it actually moves lightning light and I am caught looking stupid for wondering about it.
Responding effectively to some of the modern accusations is complicated by the fact that there are some places that Bethel just doesn't go, in accord with verses to not even say a greeting to certain ones. They like the model of the plowman who is not much good if he keeps looking behind at the furrows. They like Jesus saying wisdom is proved righteous by its works and so not responding to critics who lambaste him no matter what he does. It may be for certain perceptive ones to 'go to bat' for them, and knowing that they may not even think it a good thing to do, and that it may not even be. However, in many instances, Bethel is cool toward something until they see someone who makes it work. This is true of computer and internet developments. It was true of the quick-build arrangements.
At present it is individual rights, all the rage today, versus individual responsibilities, which is downplayed and sometimes ignored. It is the rights of individuals versus the rights of organizations that would ensure some of those rights in the case of minority beliefs. 
"Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country," are the words of John F Kennedy, thought noble for many decades after he said it. Today they would be the words of a cult leader.
I think the operating verse will be the one in Phillipians:
"True, some are preaching the Christ out of envy and rivallry, but others out of goodwill. The latter are proclaiming the Christ out of love, for they know that I have been appointed to defend the good news;p but the former do it out of contentiousness, not with a pure motive, for they are intending to create trouble for me in my prison bonds. With what result? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is being proclaimed, and I rejoice over this"
We might never have chosen the particular battlefields that opposers have chosen for us, but that does mean we cannot respond to them. 'They will lyingly say every wicked thing about you' Jesus said to his followers. Tell me about it.

There was an Awake interview of Michael Behe, who in the main supports evolution, but simply says that it has limits. It would not have happened if the two hated each others guts.
I doubt the thousands of years from the model once applied to creation means anything anymore. Particularly since they have said :we don't do anti-types anymore.' You get almost as much bang for the buck, with no downside, by saying 'this reminds us of that.' Can anyone come along later and say that it doesn't?
We can overthink things. Aren't there a few examples in theocratic histroy where memes competed with each other for a time before one emerged as the winner?
I think, with the exception of Adam and Eve, they are saying 'to each his own' as to days of creation. Let scientists be scientists and Bible teachers be Bible teachers. Even with Adam and Eve, I invite people who I think might stumble over it to think of it as a metaphor and try to discern the underlying meaning. People love being thought perceptive enough to be entrusted with such a challenge. They can go back and resolve it in more detail for themselves at a later time, if they wish, as I did.

True, it said that the mongoose relies on "God-given" defenses and abilities to defeat the cobra. No more anachronistic blaming of the teeth of saber-toothed tigers at least indirectly on Satan and the fall of the first human pair.

This is a much more reasonable approach than the rather quaint efforts to shoehorn the earth's creative week into 6x7000 yr. compartments. By that old reckoning it appears that we are 43 years in to Adam's settlement/cultivation/animal naming/no helper period and still counting.
Incidentally, whilst we are talking about adjustments, did you find the Courage from Creation videos highlighting a rather less disneyesque side to animal behaviour than usual? I mean, what will mongooses do in the New World? Crack Brazil nuts for us? I was disappointed no one mentioned the Honey Badger actually..........

Jack. I think you are trying to say that experience is bogus because it doesn't make complete sense to you. And it appears like a contradiction when we consider those famous persons who have been associated either as Witnesses or those who may have identified as JWs due to the influence of their Witness parents or family members.
I understand the cynicism about some of the experiences. I have previously shared my own discomfort when I watched  a committee of brothers enhance the experiences of Witnesses who provided experiences for the special Bethel "Family Night" gatherings. It smacked of dishonesty to me, but there was always a grain of truth in what they were enhancing, and they were usually quite careful with the wording so that it was not technically or legally an untruth. But for "Family Night" I watched the committee edit the person's own story and his own recollections with facts not in evidence just to make it sound better, and it was clearly to enhance the reputation of the WTS, and to change something just slightly so that it would not detract from that same reputation. At Bethel, I had also learned how the resume of Fred Franz' educational background had been enhanced in ways that were never corrected until the Proclaimers book came out.
But I don't know that this story in particular is enhanced. I see some potential problems, and a wise person will not simply believe everything he hears. I think the story might be perfectly true. "She was asked to take part in the Winter Olympics . . ." There is nothing unbelievable about this. Many very talented people have been on their way toward stardom and have given it up for religion or ideology or rethinking what it would mean to their life. But notice that no one is claiming that this person was invited to participate as an athlete to represent her country. It may have been that a coach wanted her there to watch. Perhaps, she showed promise as a skier, and it was a parent who asked her to go on to another few years of training to be able to take part in the Winter Olympics. This could be construed to create the statement that she was asked to take part.
Or perhaps she had already trained, and was ready, and was considered a viable competitor, but was also completing her studies with the Witnesses and was preparing for baptism. A single statement from the person studying with her might have made her change her mind. The statement in the WT above may be perfectly legitimate and not enhanced at all. I'm sure you see this as a possibility, too, even if you disagree with the decision she made.
There are non-JW experiences like this too. I remember hearing about a professional basketball player named Robinson, I think, whose mother told him he had to graduate a four-year college even though he had been asked to sign on professionally right after high school. He was offered a multi-million dollar contract, and had to give it up, and who knows what change of direction his life might have taken during that four years. He could have lost his contract, he probably cut four years of his earning potential away, but he did it for his mother, or for his agreement with her particular ideology about life and priorities. Others look at this and say B*S* because he could have played for 4 years, made millions and then gone to college if the basketball "gig" didn't work out, right? But younger people often don't know how to handle fame and money, and there are countless bodies of evidence, sometimes dead bodies, in support of this fact.
On the other hand, what is the overall point of the experience? It's the same point that should be pointed out to any who wish for fame when there are other more important things that could bring potentially more satisfaction. There is also the drive for fame and money that many young people are not realistic about. They could end up spinning their wheels for a lifetime in pursuit of something that was not really attainable. Or even if it was attainable, it may be much more transitory than they realized.
One of my daughter's good friends from high school was  a young model who was asked to work on a soap opera. She did this for two years, and did commercials, and photo layouts for fashion, and was on a billboard for years in the NY diamond district. But it only lasted for about 5 years. Although she can be proud of her work, she is today ... get this @James Thomas Rook Jr. . . .a shoe salesperson. Literally. She works in London selling Louboutin shoes, making good money, and she seems happy. Only her parents and siblings still push for her to try to get back into acting and modelling as if it were some pinnacle of achievement. (On a side note, my wife and I are in Paris right now, with my daughter, and we expect to see this same friend of hers next weekend.)
What about being the ability to be both satisfied and happy with something different than fame or money? Something that is better for oneself and others in both the short run and the long run?

I think that Jehovah's Witnesses love people strictly on an intellectual level, a "principled love".
The harder life is ... the more people love each other on an emotional level.
The fact is, in our current policy driven culture ... a deep emotional love of general humanity is impossible in most circumstances, and for most people  ..... and even normal deep family love is being systematically "bred" out of our theocratic culture.
With the adoption of extreme and cruel rules of disfellowshipping, dependent on our OWN social survival, to treat family with extreme cruelty INSTEAD of mercy, we have learned to turn love on, and off ... and back on .... like a light switch.
-------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us"  - Pogo
-------------------------
 
 
 

@Gone Away, Thanks for pointing to that thread from last year. I just skimmed it and I think it included just about all I personally would ever want to say about the topic again. I am always tempted to just rewrite from scratch, but not this time. Thanks again.

Out of interest, this term is used in the Chichewa bible to apply exclusively to Goliath in 1Samuel 17:4; 23 (champion), 51 (mighty one).

Wow! I think you should find a Catholic discussion forum and bash that religion for a few years.

Or the "state"?

*** w83 1/15 pp. 24-25 par. 7 Armed for the Fight Against Wicked Spirits ***
7 The experience of a Christian elder in Germany, who also happens to be wealthy, is noteworthy. A Christian brother, knowing something about his financial status, asked him why he drove a Volkswagen (a less expensive car) and lived in a modest apartment. Becoming very serious, he answered: ‘Because if I drove a Mercedes Benz (a luxury car) and lived in an ostentatious manner, it could have a damaging effect on the spirituality of my Christian brothers and sisters.’  How different that attitude is from the world’s! To make a “showy display of one’s means of life” is the way of the world. (1 John 2:16) According to the world, the measure of success is the amount of money and material possessions a person has. But may that never be so in the Christian organization! We need to be armed so that none of this type of satanic thinking infiltrates our own thinking and that of the Christian congregation. At the same time our own godly devotion along with contentment will result in our not being critical of those who may seem to be overlavish in their way of life.—1 Timothy 6:6-8.

@Shiwiii I appreciate the points and the thought you put into this. I do not believe that all these verses prove the same point. But I agree with something that @Space Merchant had said about how these promises about the earth which are also prevalent in the Hebrew Scriptures, are often tied into Jehovah's overall purpose. I don't actually know that we can state definitively what will become of the planet, and in what way the Bible means that God will reside with mankind. But the overall view presented in Watchtower publications makes a lot of sense of these verses in their totality.
Here we also have a scripture stating that the old Heavens is gone, dead, passed away. Could this be a restoration of the Heavens? What makes the heavens new is the new Kingdom, the new reign, the new order. We could say the same about the Earth. You make a statement showing that you also believe there is a new earth, possibly in some sense "physical," which the new Jerusalem comes down to.
The rendering of a verse in 2 Corinthians, below, matches the ideas of Rev 21 & 22. I don't see it necessary to imagine the literal existing heavens hissing away for the verses to be fulfilled. I suppose it's a matter of whether we understand the same things to be figurative or symbolic and which ones we see as literal.
I will live in them and move among them. 
I will be their God. 
They will be My people. 
'So, come away from them! 
Be separate!' says the Lord. (2 Cor. 6:16,17 SEB)

Most probably the others avoid "theatrical" spectacle because it implies acting on a stage. While this could have been the meaning, it is an interpreted one, and not necessary to imply in translating. In the context, it was much more likely that Paul was referring to the procession of those who were taken to theaters to be killed. No acting required!
Contemporary English Version
It seems to me that God has put us apostles in the worst possible place. We are like prisoners on their way to death. Angels and the people of this world just laugh at us.  [A pretty bad translation that implies angels are just laughing at people like Paul]

Good News Translation
For it seems to me that God has given the very last place to us apostles, like people condemned to die in public as a spectacle for the whole world of angels and of human beings.  [Much better in that it links the condemnation directly with the idea of being a condemned spectacle, a very common sight in Greek/Roman theaters at this time.]
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
For I suppose that God has appointed us Apostles at last, as for death, that we would be a stage play for the universe, for Angels and for men. [Same idea as the NWT]
 

 

I have read it, simply putting it out there that women are in no position to be church leaders and or having a pastoral-like position over that of men, for, the church’s structure is ever so evident and clear, even in relation to the structure of the family and or that of Adam and Eve, as to what is said and this cannot be changed regardless of how one tries to make the attempt, you cannot tweak and o change what has been set in motion and or entrusted which is in strong connection with God's Purpose and Will. Women can be ministers, teachers and prophets (prophetesses), but never has women in the church’s history from biblical times to the days of the early church and The Didache had a woman been a religious leader of authority over men, like I said, a position held by only men of authority and women are restricted to ministers and teachers, prophetess roles, as well as those who have the gifts.
This isn’t a matter of men vs. women as some people over the years make it seem to be, for this has been debated for years, and the truth itself speaks, we should be in no position to make a change of what is written.
I figured this point be made because rarely does anyone speak of the church’s actual structure and there are those quick to claim that if women are and can be ministers and prophets to teach and or prophesied, they make it seems as though they have authority to lead the church and some even make excuses and rather weak arguments, which is incorrect in many cases, granted if one reads the Bible and understands the structure from man to woman, to the family to the church correctly. Only then you will see why women cannot and will not hold a position of a authority and True Christian women will even tell you this for they know what the Bible says and these women are the very ones who will refute mainstream Christian women who do not put what is said in the Bible 100% - again, a clear distinction between a True Christian and a mainstream Christian.
I am aware of what a prophetess is, a position held by women, if I was not aware why would have I had mention these women such as Miriam, Deborah, Anna? Perhaps the others I spoke of months ago in relation to remarks made regarding the early church itself?
Ephesians 2:20-22 (Epistle to the Ephesians), One in Christ, which speaks of what is actually being read from verses 11-22 and of the actual title of said passages in the chapter - those being One in Christ, I believe this has already been discussed before regarding the Spiritual House, granted it speaks of the Christ being the very foundation of the church itself, the stone/cornerstone of the church. For such ones, both the Jews and the Gentiles, be it men or women are indeed one in Christ for the gender of one is not even irrelevant, as well as race and or position for what matters is being in the Christ, for here they themselves having the True God dwell in them as He did in Christ, as we learn later on of our early brothers and sisters of the church in the Scriptures.
As for 1 Cor. 14:29-31, it is best to read out the entire passage portion of this and the references itself. The entire Orderly Worship portion in Chapter 14 of 1 Corinthians is verses 26 to 40, this is also not only regarding the brothers, but the sisters, the women, as well, moreover, the very outline of the passage half way through is titled women's position in the church.
Granted with how one sees the passage but never put into application the very context.
People of any race, age and or gender is irrelevant, for what matters is such ones being together, one in Christ, these persons who take in knowledge that is like a treasure, having the Holy Spirit, allows God to dwell in them as He did in Jesus, and Jesus himself dwells in such ones as well, mainly if you take into account what Jesus said to His disciples in his final prayer, the same disciples who had been entrusted with the abilities of the church, of which is practiced and followed by the early church of the time, mainly in Apostle Paul's day. But is is no surprise people will use Galatians 3:28 when the very weight of what the Bible says holds more regarding the church's structure and those being one in Christ.
Some of them have already been mentioned. None of them held religious leadership and or authority of any kind in the church over men, regardless of their views.
Miriam was a Prophetess (Exodus 15:20) Deborah was a Prophetess (Judges 4:4-7, 14-16) Huldah  was a Prophetess (2 Kings 22:14-20, 2 Chronicles 34:22-28) Isaiah's wife was spoken of to be the prophetess (Isaiah 8:3) Noadiah was a Prophetess (Nehemiah 6:14) God spoke to Ezekiel of Israelite women who were acting as Prophetesses (Ezekiel 13:17-19, 13:20-23) Anna was a Prophetess (Luke 2:36-38) That of Philip’s four virgin daughters, having been prophesied under that of God’s Holy Spirit. (Acts 21:9; 1 Corinthians 12:4, 10, see Joel 2:28, 29 and Acts 2:14-18) as well as the mention of head coverings (1 Corinthians 11:3-6) Jezebel-like woman who act as Prophetesses (Revelations 2:20-23) Prophecies will be spoken in the last days by both men and women, young and old (Joel 2:28; Acts 2:17). This was seen on the Day of Pentecost, when God bypassed the priests and scribes and spoke to the people of Jerusalem through the common people of the early church (Acts 2:12; 4:13) I haven't seen Mary mentioned as a Prophetess in the Bible compared to the others, so I leave you with the opportunity to show us where exactly it says she is called a Prophetess. She did in fact met one, and that Prophetess she has met with was Anna.
Yes, but as to where female servants/slaves are said to have authority over the church, especially over that of men of authority? It is already seen as to what position they hold in teaching by means for he ministry, but never do we see the church's structure having the religious leadership position in a pastoral-like fashion held by a woman.
And yet you ignore the very structure of what has been put in place even by means of God's view? Nothing of which you are addressing shows anyone here that women hold a position of religious leadership and authority or said position of office over that of men IN the church.
Being a prophet, minister, teacher does not override the authority of a religious and or church leader of a pastoral-like level over a man of similar and or equal position. Teachers are both male and female, but according to how God’s actions through even his Son, the Christ, what is set is very specific role and action to both male and female.
According to the church’s structure, I defend what God’s Word informs us about, unlike mainstream Christendom, I do not try to alter what the Church structure is, try to change up God’s Laws because for some it is burdensome and or harsh and or seen as unnecessary, I do not try to tweak anything in relation to binding and loosening, the abilities of which has been entrusted to the Church by the Christ himself and a list of other things. I am aware enough to speak, saying by means of biblical interpretation on even this subject for years now and what is said is indeed true and unbreakable. Other than that, is is a very good thing that people like me are aware and have studied the church's history to even make known of what is actually the case in terms of religious leadership.
Why wouldn’t I know? Pentecost was indeed something that everyone knows and who was involved and who had received the outpouring of the Spirit, both men and women included, as well as all the disciples of Jesus who remained in the city, which also includes Judas’ replacement, Matthias. What took place right after the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, the helper given to the people? Those having the Spirit and by means of the Spirit’s power allow God to be with them, as he was with the Christ, these people went on to preach and teach, having people coming to know God, know his Son and what the Kingdom is all about, and those who became disciples become teachers themselves, and the cycle of making teachers of disciples continues until the conclusion of the End Times and Tribulations. But nowhere we see a woman, be it a minister, prophetess, teacher, etc take up the role of a church leader of which is only this position of authority is associated with men.
The records show us that women taught as teachers and some of them were prophetesses. No Church structure has a religious and or church leader that is a woman, and attempting to place a prophetess, a minister and or teacher in such a position is only bringing forth accursed doctrinal teachings (Galatians 1:8-11).
Now, Jesus, the head of the church did indeed call on to women to help out in this regard, and he called them into significant ministry, for He was for them. Although he did not choose women to be apostles, as some argue, it does not mean that the role of women in the church was not important at all. Jesus was one to believe that it is beneficial for the church and the family if men assumed the role of Christ-like servant and leaders, and women came in alongside with their respective gifts to help carry the leadership through according to those gifts in regards of the church, for instance, teaching, ministerial work, etc. For it is not a surprise to anyone that God has ordained that in the home and in the church men assume a special role of responsible of not only teaching, but assume role of leadership, which is in conjunction with the church structure itself by means of the head of the church.
Now, God’s Word makes known of the following, that a woman should learn in quietness and full submission, in addition, it does not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, which is the case with any leadership and or pastoral-like position, for she must be silent
1 Timothy 2:11-12 – (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. Regarding the church, God has different roles and or position for both men and women, which is in connection with the way mankind was created and the way in which sin entered the world
1 Timothy 2:13-14 – (13) For Adam was formed first, then Eve; (14) and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Our Heavenly Father, through an Apostle, Apostle Paul, has place restrictions on to women from serving in roles of leadership regarding teaching or having spiritual authority over men, a high position in the church, if you will, which prevents women from serving as pastors over men of authority, which definitely includes preaching, teaching them publicly, and exercising spiritual authority over such men.
According to the women I have mention several times here and elsewhere, some will make the claim that women can be leaders and or pastors of a church, religious leadership by ill interpretation, mainly when said interpretation is heavily focused on Miriam, Deborah, and Huldah, all of them being Prophetesses (Prophets)  in the Hebrew Old Testament. It is true, without question and or doubt, that these women were chosen by God Yahweh/Jehovah for special service to Him and that they stand as examples in the faith by means of their courage and their actions, and, yes, one can say such is somewhat of a leadership role, however, the authority of women in the Hebrew Old Testament is not relevant to the issue of pastoral-like position of leadership in the church itself; of the church. The Greek New Testament Epistles shows us a model for God’s people, the church, which is the foundation - the Body of Christ, which involves an authorial structure very unique to the church, and only the church.
Now that we are in the Greek New Testament, we can go more in-depth of both Priscilla (Prsica) and Phoebe, both of them being ministers and or teachers. We know that in Acts chapter 18, Priscilla, and her husband, Aquila, are presented as ministers. Both Priscilla and her husband teach the gospel of Jesus Christ to many, even the likes of Apollos, a Christian Jew raised in the city of Alexandria (the place of higher education and learning known for its wonderful library in those days as well as culture), the capital of the Roman province of Egypt. This man of whom the faithful and courageous couple preached to was well versed, knowledgeable and educated.
Because of  Aquila , as well as his wife, Priscilla, their ministry by means of teaching Apollos accurate knowledge of God was a success, hence God’s spirit enabled him to show enthusiasm for the right things and to be willing to accept teachings that were more accurate of which he received by means of this ministry.
The very reason it can see seen in verse 26 of the passage that they explained to him the way of God more adequately, hence why he was able to receive accurate knowledge about God as mentioned right above (Acts 18:26). Although we see this, we do not, in fact, never in the Bible that the wife of Aquila, Priscilla, held a pastoral role in a/of the church or taught publicly or became the religious leader of the church, and or a congregation of saints.
Now we go to Phoebe, a Christian woman of the church in Cenchreae. In Romans 16:1, Phoebe is called a deacon [diakonos in Greek] (or in this case, a servant), in the church and she is highly commended by Apostle Paul. But just like Priscilla, there is nothing in Scripture to indicate and or show that Phoebe was a pastor or one for having religious leadership of men of authority in the church. The ability to teach is given as a qualification for elders and or church leaders, but not for deacons (1 Timothy 3:1-13, Titus 1:6-9).
Going back to what was said above, the structure of 1 Timothy 2:11-14 pretty much makes for reason why women cannot be pastors fairly clear and analyzing Apostle Paul’s statement is very simple, mainly verse 13 to that of 11 and 12.
We also have to take into consideration that of both Adam and Eve. For this also is very simple: Adam was created first, and second came Eve. Adam was not the first to deceive, for it was the woman, Eve, who was the first deceived (again, 1 Timothy 2:11-14). God created Adam first and then created Eve to be a helper for Adam. The very order of creation has an application in the family structure as seen in Ephesians 5:22-33, and in the church, it is quite obvious of how the structure actually is.
The fact that Eve was deceived being read in 1 Timothy 2:14 as a reason for women not serving as pastors or having heighten authority over men is abundantly clear. This does not mean that women are gullible or that they are all more easily deceived than men, otherwise they would not would be in a position to even teach/care for children, having the gifts, or ministerial works. The text simple and clear, that women are not to teach men of authority or have some form of religious authority over men and the reasons for such is also clear. God Almighty has chosen to give men the primary teaching authority in the church and we can see this in scripture as well as what His Son entrusted the church.
Many women handle various gifts of which is good, such hospitality, mercy, teaching, ministerial works in accordance with the gospel, and helping/serving, there is also no restriction on praying as some nowadays also come up with a silly argument of, for in their part, they are wrong (1 Corinthians 11:5). Majority of the ministry of the church, locally, is dependent on women and their actions of contribution, for instance we have a Christian woman of God by the name of Lydia, who was most likely a Jewish proselyte. Also, the Bible nowhere restricts women from exercising the gifts that comes from the Holy Spirit itself  as seen in 1 Corinthians 12, Spiritual Gifts (1-11), One Body with Many Members (12-31). Despite not having a religious leadership role in the church and or position of office in some regard, women, just as much as men, are called to minister to others, to put into application and express that of the Fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23), and to proclaim the gospel to the those who do not know what the gospel teaches (Matthew 28:18-20, Acts 1:8, 1 Peter 3:15).
God has put into place and action that only men are to serve in positions of religious leadership which includes teaching authority in the church, in addition, some will even point to 1 Corinthians 11:3, 7-8 of which can be seen of how God has said how the church and family hierarchy should be like. This is not because men are necessarily better teachers or because women are inferior or less intelligent, but simply, it is the way God designed the church to function, it is also the way of which the Christ has set forth for the church. Men are to set the example in religious leadership in their lives, their household and through their words, on the other hand, women are to take a less authoritative role. Women are and always have been encouraged to teach other women as we read in Titus 2:3-5 and the Bible also does not restrict, as is mentioned already, women from teaching children. The only activity women are restricted from is religious authority of teaching or having authority over men thus preventing women from serving as pastors to men. This does not make women less important, but rather gives them a ministry focus more in agreement with God’s Purpose and Will, as well as the gifts HE has given to them.
We must also be very aware that True Christian women follow the examples set in the Bible itself, as seen in Proverbs 31:10-31. As sated above, women cannot hold a religious position of authority over men, an indication from the scriptures itself which is as true as the sun in the sky, but they, like men, have a full share and position of the work of the Great Commission itself, the ministry regarding the making of disciples, the spreading of the gospel to the people, bringing them to learn and take in accurate knowledge of the truth of which comes from the Bible. And as stated already, they, when taking into account how the church is structured in a family sense, teach children (Proverbs 1:8), by means of their words and action, women who are True Christians, who know what the Bible say, even to what is being discussed, work hard to be a good influence, once again, Titus 2:3-5.

Okay, now Allen, behave yourself. Seriously.
It is excellent stuff that you contribute. Don't mess it up.
You have made what appears to others as personal attacks and have been tossed on your ear several times. Have others engaged in attacks and not been tossed? I many times have been called a liar with no repurcussions at all. It doesn't matter. It is what it is.
Nobody will ever say that you do not get worked up. You cannot afford the luxury. Please, never post a comment immediately. Take time to think it over and cool off if you are heated. The most brilliant comments that you, I, or anyone else, make are quickly buried. There is no need to be hasty. Take your time.
Remember it is a public forum that you are on and people can (and do) say whatever they want. You cannot stop that.  You have to work around it somehow when they post what seems malignant.  If you hurl something ultra-harsh that gets you tossed, you have indulged your own fury, but fallen short of reaching your full power.
 

Member “Witness” at this forum has taken exception to the NWT’s rendering of 2 Cor. 5:20 as “substitutes for Christ”:

https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/topic/57458-five-year-old-raped-by-jehovahs-witness/

She states, “There is only one translation that I have found for 2 Cor 5:20, that throws in the word “substitute” – not just once, but twice – the NWT.”

What's the real story here? Is there any justification for the idea of substitution for Christ in this verse? A short one-page essay is attached.
2 Cor 5.20.pdf

A better than usual treatment of the subject. Doesn't sound like a hit piece on Witnesses.
After I retired, I was talked into taking a job in Ohio for a data center. I didn't have to travel but once a month or so, but still had to go to off-site meetings with the other directors, and these could take three or four days. One was in Ohio and one of the other attendees had been Mennonite and still went to some sort of church that seemed to be a cross between Mennonites and some other Evangelical/Fundamentalist. I asked her about the new church and she said that a lot of shunned Mennonites go there. It was started by a shunned Mennonite. I told her that I thought Amish shun but Mennonites were not quite the same. She said that Mennonites shun just as badly but it might take more to get to that point. At any rate, she said that they claim not to shun, but still do. Harshly, sometimes.

WOOOooooEEEEEEEooooooo
It is the exact same joke I was thinking of at your intro to your telling of it!
Know about the Hunchback that got a tailor made suit?

There are plenty of ways that elders and sisters and children in the congregation can "take the lead." Those with specific responsibilities should take the lead in the conduct necessary to meet those responsibilities. In Romans, the entire congregation, children included, are asked to take the lead:
(Romans 12:10) 10 In brotherly love have tender affection for one another. In showing honor to one another, take the lead. This is not specifically an extension of the role of older men. This is also about how the apostles would take the lead in honoring a sister, or a sister would take the lead in honoring an apostle. Or a young child would honor their parents, or the parents would honor the child. The honor goes to one another, so it is obviously based on respect for the dignity of each one of us, based on Christian conduct and love. We should be willing to die for one another if necessary.
(Luke 22:25-27) 25 But he said to them: “The kings of the nations lord it over them, and those having authority over them are called Benefactors. 26 You, though, are not to be that way. But let the one who is the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the one taking the lead as the one ministering. 27 For which one is greater, the one dining or the one serving? Is it not the one dining? But I am among you as the one serving. On the issue of the submission mentioned in Hebrews 13:17, note that the NWT crosses this to Ephesians 5:21 where, again, we are to be submissive to one another. There is an order with respect to responsibilities, but wives are honored in that the husband should have the attitude and willingness to give up his life for his wife, just as Christ had that much love for the congregation.
(Ephesians 5:21-26) 21 Be in subjection to one another in fear of Christ. 22 Let wives be in subjection to their husbands as to the Lord, 23 because a husband is head of his wife just as the Christ is head of the congregation, he being a savior of this body. 24 In fact, as the congregation is in subjection to the Christ, wives should also be to their husbands in everything. 25 Husbands, continue loving your wives, just as the Christ also loved the congregation and gave himself up for it. The idea of Hebrews 13:17 is probably better linked to 1 Th 5:12, about showing respect (honor) for those doing the work required to preside and teach and admonish. Still, this is all in the context of people doing their part in serving others based on their gifts and abilities. Those older men, especially, who teach must work harder to prepare material that meets the needs of the congregation. They are watching the congregation as a good shepherd would for areas of weakness and danger and areas where more encouragement and good examples are needed. Since they are working to meet the needs of the congregation, the congregation would do well to be obedient and submissive, as this is directly related to the upbuilding and encouragement of both the overseers and those who are being watched. Humbly following good admonition brings joy to those doing shepherding work and brings joy to those following the admonition. It's another form of mutual encouragement that helps to build up the congregation.
(1 Thessalonians 5:11-15) 11 Therefore, keep encouraging one another and building one another up, just as you are in fact doing. 12 Now we request you, brothers, to show respect for those who are working hard among you and presiding over you in the Lord and admonishing you; 13 and to give them extraordinary consideration in love because of their work. Be peaceable with one another. 14 On the other hand, we urge you, brothers, to warn the disorderly, speak consolingly to those who are depressed, support the weak, be patient toward all. 15 See that no one repays injury for injury to anyone, but always pursue what is good toward one another and to all others  

I went to the site and read about the kinds of testicular medical problems you can get from tight pants, and it reminded me of a dirty joke. Which you can find here: http://www.ebaumsworld.com/jokes/tight-underwear/1057145/
Or, it's a pretty old joke, so I could just copy it:
The doctor said, "Joe, the good news is I can cure your headaches. The bad news is that it will require castration. You have a very rare condition, which causes your testicles to press on your spine, and the pressure creates one hell of a headache. The only way to relieve the pressure is to remove the testicles."

Joe was shocked and depressed. He wondered if he had anything to live for. He couldn't concentrate long enough to answer, but decided he had no choice but to go under the knife.

When he left the hospital he was without a headache for the first time in 20 years, but he felt like he was missing an important part of himself. As he walked down the street, he realized that he felt like a different person. He could make a new beginning and live a new life. He saw a men's clothing store & thought, "That's what I need - a new suit."

He entered the shop and told the salesman, "I'd like a new suit." The elderly tailor eyed him briefly and said, "Let's see ... size 44 long." Joe laughed, "That's right, how did you know?" "Been in the business 60 years!" Joe tried on the suit. It fit perfectly.

As Joe admired himself in the mirror, the salesman asked, "How about a new shirt?" Joe thought for a moment and then said, "Sure." The salesman eyed Joe and said, "Let's see, 34 sleeve & 16-1/2 neck." Again, Joe was surprised, "That's right, how did you know?" "Been in the business 60 years!"

Joe tried on the shirt, and it fit perfectly. As Joe adjusted the collar in the mirror, the salesman asked, "How about new shoes?" Joe was on a roll and said, "Sure." The salesman eyed Joe's feet and said, "Let's see ... 9-1/2 E." Joe was astonished, "That's right, how did you know?" "Been in the business 60 years!"

Joe tried on the shoes and they fit perfectly. Joe walked comfortably around the shop and the salesman asked, "How about some new underwear?" Joe thought for a second and said, "Sure." The salesman stepped back, eyed Joe's waist and said, "Let's see... size 36."
 
 
[wait scroll for it]
 


Joe laughed. "Ah ha! I got you! I've worn size 34 since I was 18 years old." The salesman shook his head, "You can't wear a size 34. A size 34 underwear would press your testicles up against the base of your spine and give you one hell of a headache.