Link: Copy link
"I am not a lawyer but when does seeking legalistic loopholes become legalism?"I am not a lawyer but when does seeking legalistic loopholes become legalism?
When I brush up on my old 1920s algebra and radio books I am seeking information as a disciple. It never occurs to me to challenge documents.
NONE of the hired roles have any intention of PREACHING the Word by READING the Word for Doctrine and Comfort. God bless their hearts you can get a degree at LU learning how to read the text by using your imagination? Or by Divination!
That may be why Jesus translates our spirits into a heavenly kingdom and LOCKS UP the tiny Little Flock to protect them from the WORLD.
Taking a break.Feminists scholars try to strip 1 Corinthians 14 of clear statements about women: they appeal to Clement of Alexandria but as usual no one reads the originals. What Clement said was that both WOMEN and MEN had the liberty to BE SILENT. They both had the liberty--if they wanted to go and teach--to be martyrs.
And we “do not cast that which is holy before dogs, nor pearls before swine;” but with all possible self-restraint, and with all discretion, and with all fear of God, and with earnestness of mind we praise God. For we do not minister where heathens are drinking and blaspheming in their feasts with words of impurity, because of their wickedness.
Therefore do we not sing psalms to the heathens,
<font color="#FFFFFF">.....nor do we read to them the Scriptures,
.....that we may not be like common singers,
.....either those who play on the lyre,
.....or those who sing with the voice,
.....or like soothsayers, as many are,
.....who follow these practices and do these things, that they may sate themselves with a paltry mouthful of bread,
.....and who, for the sake of a sorry cup of wine,
.....go about “singing the songs of the Lord in the STRING land” of the heathen, and doing what is not right.
But see what it says also concerning those holy men, the prophets, and concerning the apostles of our Lord. Let us see whether any one of these holy men was constantly with maidens, or with young married women, or with such widows as the divine apostle declines to receive.
Clement traces all of the falls in the Old Testament to women. They were despised by godly women as setting females over them is also despised.
In contrast men like Rick Atchley and his disciples dismiss or demote the DEACONS as co-teachers with the elders to someone to call if your roof starts leaking. In their place they heap on a host of female ministers (rationaled as deaconesses) and violate minimal caution. No wonder that preachers get shotguned and wives get Anti-freezed.
Thanks, Justly. I am familiar with the terms "Complementarianism" and "egalitarianism." We ran across "latitudinalism" a while back. This is not my academic area of study: I entered sideways, so to speak, because my heart broke over the loss of so many of what I thought of as fine congregations Nashville, and elsewhere, too. These "isms" had less to do with the losses than a failure to react positively to transitional neighborhoods. I do not seem to be able to post images to this forum or I would present some then and now photos.
Just some terms you may want to get familiar with if you pursue this discussion. I'm going to bail due to health concerns (cat scratch fever). Good luck!
"Complementarianism" is the teaching that masculinity and femininity are ordained by God and that men and women are created to complement, or complete, each other. Complementarians believe that the gender roles found in the Bible are purposeful and meaningful distinctions that, when applied in the home and church, promote the spiritual health of both men and women. Embracing the divinely ordained roles of men and woman furthers the ministry of God’s people and allows men and women to reach their God-given potential.
The opposing view is "egalitarianism", which teaches that, in Christ, there are no gender distinctions anymore. This idea comes from Galatians 3:28. Because all believers are one in Christ, egalitarians say, men’s and women’s roles are interchangeable in church leadership and in the household.
An astute analysis would conclude both yield salvation. I think you make a play on "distinction" for a distraction.[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Is a distinction being made here between the mouth and the heart?
v. 9: mouth confessing ---------> heart believing
v. 10: heart believing ----------> mouth confessing[/color]
Patrick Mead in his latest short stays in churches is probably the boaster that HE would take a female preaching intern: why not, he just makes up stuff as he goes with a Bible title.
The Video has been shut down of the preaching lady maybe she would put it back up. We have hacked 4th since Halal took it over and spend a fortune building a recording studio and making this historic building into a theater for performing arts or not too artsy. I believe he boasted about being the first to accept one of LU's Lady Leader's new preaching ministers. Daughters of Eve as their avowed mother dominating males.
They were called down and took down the performance.
http://www.faughnfamily.com/open-letter ... ch-christ/
Here is some of Patrick Meads sermons: I want to get at that dancing with God where David's naked dance is a pattern.
This is my opinion of Patrick's preaching
<font face="arial" size="4">All comments welcomed. William Hall suggested this thread</font>
[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Correct: a distraction ... which actually began a few posts earlier. [/color]An astute analysis would conclude both yield salvation. I think you make a play on "distinction" for a distraction.