|
Post by Greg on Nov 21, 2014 20:38:09 GMT -5
I never cared for that view. I find it to be quite untrue and really quite arrogant...and ignorant. Greg, have you ever been married? No. Have you?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2014 20:38:50 GMT -5
Yes, Jesus told them not to go from house to house - but in his last week he seems to have stayed in maybe three different houses. That's a mystery. And Paul said a woman should keep quiet in church - yet here he is defending woman preachers. That's another mystery. I would first trust the example, then the wording of a particular verse. The "go not house to house" was for the sending of the message that the messiah had come. Paul defended (and promoted?) women in general being helpers, not necessarily preachers. Very likely the women to be silent in the church means just that, in the church gathering the woman is to be silent. A common explanation for why there were women preachers *** with authority *** and yet to "keep silence in church" is that in Greek and Latin cultures women used to talk a lot. I know because I sometimes attend a Greek Orthodox church and see this first hand. Paul might not have been saying "don't preach" (why would he?!) but "respect the silence of your church."
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Nov 21, 2014 20:39:53 GMT -5
Not sure where the modern "Worker" term stems from, but this could be a clue:Corinthians 6. "We then, as workers together with him, beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain. (For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee: behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.) Giving no offence in any thing, that the ministry be not blamed: But in all things approving ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses, In stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults, in labours, in watchings, in fastings; By pureness, by knowledge, by long suffering, by kindness, by the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned, By the word of truth, by the power of God, by the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left, By honour and dishonour, by evil report and good report: as deceivers, and yet true; As unknown, and yet well known; as dying, and, behold, we live; as chastened, and not killed; As sorrowful, yet alway rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, and yet possessing all things."and this one ought be on a thread of its own, " ... Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?" Probably from the Faith Mission, who probably used the above.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Nov 21, 2014 20:43:06 GMT -5
The "go not house to house" was for the sending of the message that the messiah had come. Paul defended (and promoted?) women in general being helpers, not necessarily preachers. Very likely the women to be silent in the church means just that, in the church gathering the woman is to be silent. A common explanation for why there were women preachers *** with authority *** and yet to "keep silence in church" is that in Greek and Latin cultures women used to talk a lot. I know because I sometimes attend a Greek Orthodox church and see this first hand. Paul might not have been saying "don't preach" (why would he?!) but "respect the silence of your church."Could you define "preacher"? Do you mean one that held a church service and gave a sermon under the authority of church leaders? I do not remember reading of such in the New Testament.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Nov 21, 2014 20:44:15 GMT -5
Greg, have you ever been married? No. Have you? Currently married!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2014 20:46:25 GMT -5
Quote - "Probably from the Faith Mission, who probably used the above."
This is Parker's Secret Sect mentality - ie WE got it from the Faith Mission because THEY used it. Maybe we either: a - use it because we could see the scriptural validity of Faith Mission using it b - use it because it's in the bible.
by going along with this "Faith Mission Theory" people think they can absolve themselves of many things we believe - passing them off as coming from anywhere other than the bible.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2014 20:51:32 GMT -5
Quote - "Could you define "preacher"? Do you mean one that held a church service and gave a sermon under the authority of church leaders? I do not remember reading of such in the New Testament.
Two definitions in the NT a - a preacher as one who stopped his daily routine to preach casually b - a preacher as in one ordained and lives under Ministry and its constraints.
Phillip the evangelist was (a) from my website Philip was on seven chosen to care for temporal issues the Apostles had no time for. Soon after Saul persecuted the church. All but the Apostles were scattered, and people “went every where preaching the word” (Acts 8:2.) Philip fled to Samaria. He preached to the Samaritans, and baptized some (then later the Eunuch in Gaza.) But Philip could not impart the Holy Ghost because he wasn’t an Apostle and could not pass on this gift himself – Peter and John performed this themselves. Philip did not continue traveling like Peter and John. He later had his own house in Caesarea. He apparently was married and had four daughters. These women might have been in the ministry themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Nov 21, 2014 20:58:35 GMT -5
Quote - "Probably from the Faith Mission, who probably used the above." This is Parker's Secret Sect mentality - ie WE got it from the Faith Mission because THEY used it. Maybe we either: a - use it because we could see the scriptural validity of Faith Mission using it b - use it because it's in the bible.
by going along with this "Faith Mission Theory" people think they can absolve themselves of many things we believe - passing them off as coming from anywhere other than the bible.Very likely the term "worker" was accepted by the first friends and workers as they heard it used in the Faith Mission because it was biblical as a descriptor. Not so much for the Faith Mission term/title "pilgrim".
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Nov 21, 2014 21:05:00 GMT -5
Quote - "Could you define "preacher"? Do you mean one that held a church service and gave a sermon under the authority of church leaders? I do not remember reading of such in the New Testament. Two definitions in the NT a - a preacher as one who stopped his daily routine to preach casually b - a preacher as in one ordained and lives under Ministry and its constraints.
Phillip the evangelist was (a) from my website Philip was on seven chosen to care for temporal issues the Apostles had no time for. Soon after Saul persecuted the church. All but the Apostles were scattered, and people “went every where preaching the word” (Acts 8:2.) Philip fled to Samaria. He preached to the Samaritans, and baptized some (then later the Eunuch in Gaza.) But Philip could not impart the Holy Ghost because he wasn’t an Apostle and could not pass on this gift himself – Peter and John performed this themselves. Philip did not continue traveling like Peter and John. He later had his own house in Caesarea. He apparently was married and had four daughters. These women might have been in the ministry themselves.
Okay. So "preaching" means talking about something or someone (Jesus) with/to others. Not necessarily officially, as under authorization and direct commission as a "preacher". Preaching likely went on outside of official or commissioned church service.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Nov 21, 2014 21:10:09 GMT -5
The "go not house to house" was for the sending of the message that the messiah had come. Paul defended (and promoted?) women in general being helpers, not necessarily preachers. Very likely the women to be silent in the church means just that, in the church gathering the woman is to be silent. Paul was writing to Christian women in the worship gathering to keep silent by NOT asking questions of so and so speaking in languages they didn't understand. They should wait and ask the questions when they get homes. Asking questions in the gathering cause too much commotion, confusion. These Christians women prayed, spoke, sings in their first day of the week worship gathering. Paul told the men to keep silence if they spoke in languages without an interpreters.
There is NO indication Paul said women preachers to keep silent. It is contradiction against the Scriptures! Acts 2:16-18 6 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: and on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: I do not doubt that Paul wanted the unlearned wives (could mean all the wives) to ask questions of their husbands at home or anywhere outside the church gathering. Still, he very well meant for the woman - all women - (not just wives) to be silent in the church.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2014 21:20:52 GMT -5
They were church elders... Paul wrote in Romans 16:3-5 Greet Prisca and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus, who for my life risked their own necks, to whom not only do I give thanks, but also all the churches of the Gentiles; also greet the church that is in their house. They could still be workers and have church in their house. Interesting that the workers say that workers have to sell all but it is also clear that the church sold all and shared everything as in Priscilla and Aquila's case. Why do the workers say they have to do it but not the 'church'. Either both were for Jesus day or both were not. Where does it say they stayed 2 - 3 years in one place? Paul remained in his hired house for 2 years but I don't remember reading that they were to say 2 - 3 years in one place. And Paul was alone too and people came to him. It seems that the apostles were on the move a lot and did not stay in one place for longer than a few weeks or months at the most. They were continually on the move. Interesting also is that Jesus told them not to go house to house. The workers stay in several different houses in a city. interesting verse: Luk_10:7 And in the same house remain, eating and drinking such things as they give: for the labourer is worthy of his hire. Go not from house to house. i wonder how they implemented that because it really doesn't say exactly what they did...
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Nov 21, 2014 21:26:52 GMT -5
When I was in the work I stayed in Dave Christies' homes many times. I talked to him a little bit of his upbringing in Hawaii a few years before he died. It wasn't easy life for him and his sister. When I see his wife at Boring convention next year, I will ask her if she wouldn't mind tell me more about Dave's experiences growing up in Hawaii with his parents as workers. They had their own home in Hawaii, they didn't move around/living in different homes of the friends every 2 or 3 nights, like the unmarried workers. I know this. It just gives me cause to not be so sure that Priscilla and Aquila were "workers" just because there was meeting in their house -- when there are married workers in our day who "owned" houses. Also, there have been meetings in workers' "baches" -- is there some significantly spiritually different between living in a bach and living in a house? Anyway, Jesus told the not to go from house to house anyway ... so however one makes that fit with the requirement to keep going from house to house among the friends ?!?!
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Nov 21, 2014 21:38:40 GMT -5
They could still be workers and have church in their house. Interesting that the workers say that workers have to sell all but it is also clear that the church sold all and shared everything as in Priscilla and Aquila's case. Why do the workers say they have to do it but not the 'church'. Either both were for Jesus day or both were not. Where does it say they stayed 2 - 3 years in one place? Paul remained in his hired house for 2 years but I don't remember reading that they were to say 2 - 3 years in one place. And Paul was alone too and people came to him. It seems that the apostles were on the move a lot and did not stay in one place for longer than a few weeks or months at the most. They were continually on the move. Interesting also is that Jesus told them not to go house to house. The workers stay in several different houses in a city. interesting verse: Luk_10:7 And in the same house remain, eating and drinking such things as they give: for the labourer is worthy of his hire. Go not from house to house. i wonder how they implemented that because it really doesn't say exactly what they did... Does it mean anything other than they were paying their way -- if not with money, then with labor? Paul was a tent maker, but I would guess he never wrote about his tent making to Christians. Even the "collection" mentioned in the NT was not for the apostles/disciples -- it was for the poor "saints" in Jerusalem.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Nov 21, 2014 21:43:17 GMT -5
Paul was writing to Christian women in the worship gathering to keep silent by NOT asking questions of so and so speaking in languages they didn't understand. They should wait and ask the questions when they get homes. Asking questions in the gathering cause too much commotion, confusion. These Christians women prayed, spoke, sings in their first day of the week worship gathering. Paul told the men to keep silence if they spoke in languages without an interpreters.
There is NO indication Paul said women preachers to keep silent. It is contradiction against the Scriptures! Acts 2:16-18 6 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: and on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: I do not doubt that Paul wanted the unlearned wives (could mean all the wives) to ask questions of their husbands at home or anywhere outside the church gathering. Still, he very well meant for the woman - all women - (not just wives) to be silent in the church. According to Jews, women are/were notorious for gossiping and being noisy in synagogue while the men were doing their holy business -- since women in those days had no authority to do much more than just sit there. Some synagogues even today have services where only men attend.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Nov 21, 2014 21:43:27 GMT -5
They could still be workers and have church in their house. Interesting that the workers say that workers have to sell all but it is also clear that the church sold all and shared everything as in Priscilla and Aquila's case. Why do the workers say they have to do it but not the 'church'. Either both were for Jesus day or both were not. Where does it say they stayed 2 - 3 years in one place? Paul remained in his hired house for 2 years but I don't remember reading that they were to say 2 - 3 years in one place. And Paul was alone too and people came to him. It seems that the apostles were on the move a lot and did not stay in one place for longer than a few weeks or months at the most. They were continually on the move. Interesting also is that Jesus told them not to go house to house. The workers stay in several different houses in a city. interesting verse: Luk_10:7 And in the same house remain, eating and drinking such things as they give: for the labourer is worthy of his hire. Go not from house to house. i wonder how they implemented that because it really doesn't say exactly what they did... This was during the mission to announce the coming of the messiah. I have read somewhere that such hospitality - to receive a guest, even a stranger in a home for a certain duration - was common in the then Israel.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Nov 21, 2014 21:46:56 GMT -5
I do not doubt that Paul wanted the unlearned wives (could mean all the wives) to ask questions of their husbands at home or anywhere outside the church gathering. Still, he very well meant for the woman - all women - (not just wives) to be silent in the church. No, that is NOT true about Paul... If you were to read I Cor 14.... He gave the Christians women equal rights in the ministry and churches... speaking/preaching... He was a man ahead of his time, days and cultures. As with many topics, we have gone over this before. Paul was writing to the brethren - the men of the church. Outside the official church gathering the speaking/preaching/prophesying was not so limited.
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Nov 21, 2014 22:09:12 GMT -5
Yes, clearly some came into the Work already married. Peter most likely being a good case of this. You sure Peter was in the work? I thought he was a disciple of Jesus, sent to preach the gospel of Jesus.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2014 23:02:10 GMT -5
Yes, clearly some came into the Work already married. Peter most likely being a good case of this. You sure Peter was in the work? I thought he was a disciple of Jesus, sent to preach the gospel of Jesus. Yes, he was a Worker. At least, that is what Paul called the profession. He didn't say he was a:
sub Deacon Deacon Diocesan Ordinary Auxiliary Bishop Coadjutor Bishop Diocesan Administrator Assistant Priest Chaplain of His Holiness Honorary Prelate Metropolitan Bishop Monsignor Chancellor Vicar General Presbyteral Councilor Diocesan Synodian Pastoral Councilor College Consultator Diocesan Administrator Diocesan Bishop Bishop Apostolic Administrator Apostolic Prefect Territorial Abbot Territorial Prelate Primate Cardinal Bishop Cardinal Pope
... and that's just the Catholic Church hierarchy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2014 23:23:00 GMT -5
You sure Peter was in the work? I thought he was a disciple of Jesus, sent to preach the gospel of Jesus. Yes, he was a Worker. At least, that is what Paul called the profession. He didn't say he was a:
sub Deacon Deacon Diocesan Ordinary Auxiliary Bishop Coadjutor Bishop Diocesan Administrator Assistant Priest Chaplain of His Holiness Honorary Prelate Metropolitan Bishop Monsignor Chancellor Vicar General Presbyteral Councilor Diocesan Synodian Pastoral Councilor College Consultator Diocesan Administrator Diocesan Bishop Bishop Apostolic Administrator Apostolic Prefect Territorial Abbot Territorial Prelate Primate Cardinal Bishop Cardinal Pope
... and that's just the Catholic Church hierarchy.
you forgot to mention, a leader of a cult
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Nov 21, 2014 23:51:46 GMT -5
Peter was a disciple NOT a worker !
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2014 23:56:33 GMT -5
Peter was a disciple NOT a worker ! peter was also an apostle...
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Nov 22, 2014 0:14:49 GMT -5
His overseer must have been a bit slack. He most likely had reasonably long hair which was the custom, (no short back and sides in those days), a beard, and wore a robe that looked more like a dress than a two piece suit. Fancy allowing such worldly goings on.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2014 0:16:29 GMT -5
His overseer must have been a bit slack. He most likely had reasonably long hair which was the custom, (no short back and sides in those days), a beard, and wore a robe that looked more like a dress than a two piece suit. Fancy allowing such worldly goings on. I call this the "Donkey Fallacy" ie Jesus rode on the donkey. His Way never changes Therefor we too ride donkeys.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2014 0:27:51 GMT -5
His overseer must have been a bit slack. He most likely had reasonably long hair which was the custom, (no short back and sides in those days), a beard, and wore a robe that looked more like a dress than a two piece suit. Fancy allowing such worldly goings on. were you there? i read in the Bible that long hair on a man is an abomination to God was Paul not an apostle like Peter?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2014 0:30:17 GMT -5
His overseer must have been a bit slack. He most likely had reasonably long hair which was the custom, (no short back and sides in those days), a beard, and wore a robe that looked more like a dress than a two piece suit. Fancy allowing such worldly goings on. I call this the "Donkey Fallacy" ie Jesus rode on the donkey. His Way never changes Therefor we too ride donkeys.you mean like donkey oatie i wonder if he had long hair and wore a fancy two piece suit
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2014 0:31:57 GMT -5
Peter was a disciple NOT a worker ! peter was also an apostle... like Paul who was a worker
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Nov 22, 2014 1:12:12 GMT -5
peter was also an apostle... like Paul who was a worker Paul was not a worker either !
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Nov 22, 2014 1:13:33 GMT -5
like Paul who was a worker Paul was not a worker either ! Virgo chapter & verse where it says Paul was a worker ?
|
|