In Reply to: Re: My take... posted by Pastor Don on April 21, 2010 at 21:54:52:
Pastor Don...beside/inspite my respect for your ministry and my fellow-brethren in that particular Pentecostal church in America or whoever else feels affiliated...I do differ on many major portions of the Bible with you...not that I find that very comfortable...nor did I
do that necessarily upon own preference...for if I ask my feelings, I would have loved to be mated again alas it cannot be and I accept that...likewise speaking in foreign tongues seems "fashionable", mighty and whatnot...however I haven't experienced yet anyone, who spoke in tongues and where that voice was unmistakingly in an unlearned language...though there are some claims...yet I haven't experienced anyone (there are also mediums who play an instrument without having learned that)...so what I have heard so far is the chatteringlike mutter/utterance practiced in TF...converted Aborigenes have said...some of that reminds them of their practices of past heathen times...such "spiritism" or effects/signs are not limited to the Christian world...I bet you know that.
Frankly in my journey I distanced myself "instinctively"...I avoid using the terminology: I was led by the Lord (I follow, but sometimes via errors)...from too much "spiritism" after TF...since I was frustrated with the bad effects in TF...on the other hand I couldn't 100% go along with the Cessationists either...of the Darby-kind e.g....though I appreciated very much their attitude of searching foremost the Word, plus demonizing quickly people who don't share 100% their take...however I profited very much by distancing myself from the charismatic approach to scripture...I think it was Wayne Grudem who tried at length to refute Cessationism and also relativating
Eph 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner [stone];
The problem is, that Eph 2:20 is in the plural so as some critics of Grudem have pointed out, the original GS-rule does not apply...so far no opposit exception to his rule(s) have been found, but it's a rule of observation/induction anyway...not deduction...grammatically.
Why I say that?Cause there are neo-apostolic movements...and Berg was "content" with being the endtime David/prophet...others want to be an apostle...a modern...Bonifatius is called the apostle to the Germans (8th century if I remember right)...though there have been believers in Germany before him...
So people like to be prophets or apostles or calling them that way....see William Branham or others...I read after TF too many bad incidences of so called anointed people...that was my way of healing from TF, by distancing myself from such stances
Frankly I am a bit "bewildered"...why you embraced such stances after leaving TF???Before I entered into any church for longer I searched their websites and books, to find out what their theological take is.
The linked article I find wanting...either you tell very much...then it becomes though longer, but more precise or when shorter you link at least to preciser, more exhaustive articles...if they had done that, they would have at least not given the impression, that it is 100%
sure, that Junia is female and was an apostle...I tried to show that with the links of very studied female Profs...who might be even leaning towards feminist theology...
All the verses shared in that AG paper don't justify/explain todays preaching/teaching in church of female pastors...why??Because I think that whereever there are still able men available in any part of the world...I think God still wants them to minister to the congregation...to unbelievers as a testimony etc. is a total differnt situation again...and I think people lump that altogether...
Besides..dear Pastor Don..I found the AG's paper/file on divorce and remarriage already much in want...so what to say???Many churches always are touting of how much they base their particular take on the Bible...I can't hear or stand that anymore..."we're right...we say so...the Bible tells us so"...TF did the same and only they were/are so speculative, that they hanged themselves or tied themselves...with all their "knotty"/naughty/nutty interpretations.
I am amazed, that you didn't join much on the discussion/thread of covering the hair...I guess your church can dismiss that by now??...I haven't seen too many western female believers with their head/hair covered while praying...not important I guess???..
What about the position of the male in marriage or the female???
Eph 5:20 Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ;
Eph 5:21 Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.
Eph 5:22 ¶ Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
Eph 5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
Eph 5:24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so [let] the wives [be] to their own husbands in every thing.
Eph 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
Eph 5:26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
Eph 5:27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
Eph 5:28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.
Eph 5:29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:
Eph 5:30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
Eph 5:31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
Eph 5:32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
Eph 5:33 Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife [see] that she reverence [her] husband.
Feminists seem to quickly overlook verse 25 and many/most men as well...that's what is expected of a very good husband to whom the "weaker" wive might much easier be inclined to submit...so the trouble could have started with the attitude of men???
It doesn't help any in the interpretation more...to use the additional meaning of kefale/head...as also being: source...like of a river...just adds to the general picture...so what???
1Cr 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman [is] the man; and the head of Christ [is] God.
Does it make more/better sense using here "source"???...the context anyway talks about head/hair...covering...something on top of it...a power...
And if the AG argues with OT... helper etc...I would like to know of them, why Sarah called her husband lord??
Gen 18:12 Therefore Sarah laughed within herself, saying, After I am waxed old shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?
1Pe 3:6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.
If I were you, I would diligently search the scriptures and the deeper greek etymology of the particular Bible wordings on an issue and not just "copycat"...like we did in TF...but that way I hardly will join any church, because too many churchleaders want their comfortable status quo...their nice traditions...few times scholars are super diligent ...whether any has been totally exhaustive on a subject ...I don't know yet...though some would like to claim that...I sense/observed....however I make sure to have very good material...websites and books about a point of question...too dark for my sensors to grasp immediately the fine shading..
But that AG paper isn't even worth linking...sorry..may be as a bad example...are you trying to win people like that???
At least the feminist theologians give a complex reasoning for Junia vs Junias...female vs. male...though both theoretically possible...the latter though not likely...still grammatically it's also possible, to only speak of Junia as being noted/respected among the (main) apostles...One thing we know for sure...she wasn't one of the inner twelve...that should already show something to the Pentecostals???...
The subject is timeconsuming...and it's not my main priority for the moment...but I can tell you...I would leave gatherings...a congregation, where women try to preach to men...I have very few books of female authors ...sometimes to see their side...but it's rather an exception...
But I guess you made up your mind already anyway???I want to stay open for debate/considerations...but people need very convincing arguments to sway me and that 7/8 page-paper/file is just not enough...sorry