Paula White, Juanita Bynum and the "New Wave' of Female Preachers

[J.A.I]

I don't remember whether I read the thing about girls in the temple, but it's true

You do realize how that sounds, correct ? If it is not Bible backed, I don't pay it any attention.

the authority is the orthodox church (I read it in an orthodox book),

Fallible. Again... You do realize how that sounds, correct ? If it is not Bible backed, I don't pay it any attention. The church is not authority. Jesus is. God's Word is. Jesus is the Word made flesh.

that girls lived in the temple and prepared food and helped maintain the temple; they left at the age of 12.

Scriptures ?

Again... If it is not Bible backed, I don't pay it any attention.

So do me a favor, find the scriptures in the Bible, and then show those to me.

Please don't let men brainwash you with another gospel.

 

[Daedalus]

So you believe in the Bible then.
It is the bible that you worship?
No, you worhsip Jesus Christ, and Jesus dind't write any gospel just because he knew that his Church will keep his words.
The apostoles recieved holy spirit so they were not wrong.
Their apostoles recieved holy spirit and they were not wrong.
The line has not been broken and the holy spirit is still in the orthodox church .
There are tons of writings from the early church that were not included in the bible because there was no room and no need to do so.

It is the "new sects" as I call them, that choose to trust only in the Bible.
And it would be so great if if they did even that, but they believe in their own theoreis over the bible, not in the bible itself.
The bible is a book, and it does not speak; it speaks thorugh the Chruch.

Haha... so you trust the bible only?
Did Jesus write the Bible then?
No, the early orthodox church compiled the bible by it's authority.
So the orthodox church is the authority because it wrote the bible.
Others translated the bible but did not compile it (at best removed some parts of the NT).
So all I can say to those believing in the bible only is- FLAWED, FLAWED, FLAWED, the bible is just another book that contains the truth the Orthodox Church compiled.

Yes, the church (Orthodox Church) cannot be wrong.
I'm sory to say this, I don't blame the Catholic church, but the Orthodox Curch never issued any documents saying something that was later proven worng -- the orthodox church was never wrong ; look at it's history and you will not find one flaw in it (heretics are not orthodox).
A man can be wrong, but the Church as a whole cannot.
More, in suport of the Catholic Church -- some people said that the Earth was flat, not the church itself; it was the Catholic Church flaw to let a man decide on something, it still does not make the Chruch wrong.

 

[J.A.I]

Okay You believe what you want to believe.

And I will, as I already said, rely on the Holy Spirit to teach and guide me

For the Orthodox, the Bible is the book of the Church, written by and for those who believe in God and constitute His People. The Four Gospels are the center of the Bible, just as Christ is the center of the Church. For this reason the Four Gospels are always enthroned on the altar in the Orthodox Church building.

The Orthodox generally interpret the Bible in terms of Christ. In this sense, the Old Testament is partial in that it prepares for the time of Christ, the Messiah, who fulfills its message and history.

The New Testament writings are also centered around Christ and tell of His action in the world and in the Church through the Holy Spirit.

Thus the Orthodox position about the Bible, would be that the New Testament is prefigured in the Old, and the Old Testament is fulfilled in the New.

The Bible is central in the life of the Church and gives both form and content to the Church's liturgical and sacramental worship, just as to its theology and spiritual life. Nothing in the Orthodox Church can be opposed to what is revealed in the Bible. Everything in the Church must be biblical.

The Bible itself, however, not only determines and judges the life of the Church, but is itself judged by the Church since it "comes alive" and receives its proper interpretation and significance only within the life of the Church as actually lived and experienced by the People of God.

This would be the basic Orthodox approach to the Bible. Very sadly however, it must be mentioned that the knowledge of the Bible among Orthodox is not very great. There is a conscious attempt being made today to renew the reading and meditation of the scriptures by the faithful of the Church.

Your reasoning continues to be flawed b/c it is rather biased and sounds as though you have no mind of your own, which I am sure you do.

The church says, the church says...

 

[Daedalus]

Yes I have a mind, and I use it the nest way I can.
I'm going to be an robotics engineer; that's wat I now best.
I don't have the training of a priest and so I will listen to what he and the Church says.
I think in horrour of what would happen if a priest came and messed with the software I write for instance.

 

[vanshan]

Daedelaus is correct the Orthodox Church wrote and compiled the Bible we all love; this is not bias just historic fact.

Regarding women being preachers this is clearly unbiblical and against Holy Tradition, dating all the way back to Christ and beyond in Judaism. It's not that we look down on women, they just can't be in an authoritative postion over men. In our current age these restrictions based on gender seem unfair and are politically incorrect but the Church is not politically correct!

Women are highly esteemed though. We have many female saints who are beacons of light for both men and women. As a man I am more than willing to venerate the holiness of these amazing women of God.

Basil

 

[SumTinWong]

Daedelaus is correct the Orthodox Church wrote and compiled the Bible we all love; this is not bias just historic fact.

Actually it is historical fact that the Bible was handed down to the prophets (moses, jeremiah, paul, peter, etc...), from God himself and put down on paper by those said prophets. The Torah existed well before the RCC and Orthodox churches. The Orthodox, and Catholic Church have no claim on authorship of any works of the Bible but can lay claim to assembling the Bible, and translating it into Latin. It was protestants that translated it further into German and English, which is what I read today.

None of us "sects" worship the Bible, we worship the God of the Bible. What we do is not follow the traditions of men. You state with all veracity that it is a fact that Mary was grown up in a temple until the age of twelve. Proof? There isn't any. It is all tradition and heresay. You all say that Mary was the greatest of Jesus disciples.

Well what about John the Baptist who while he was still in the wombs was filled with the Holy Ghost and who Jesus himself said:
Mat 11:11 Truly I say to you, Among those who have been born of women there has not risen a greater one than John the Baptist. But the least in the kingdom of Heaven is greater than he.

So who was the greatest again? And please don't say that John was not a disciple of Christ, He foretold and prophesied of the coming and baptized him. Jesus said among those born of women John was the greatest.

So if Mary was the greatest why isn't more written of her in the Bible? Why don't the gospel writers, and epistles elude to her more than a few lines that leave doubt in the minds of millions? Why wouldn't jesus himself have made mention of her as being the greatest? There are obscure stories of all kinds of people like that Jabez guy. But there is nothing in the NT that tells me what you say. I ask you to explain to me why?

That is why I don't believe in the traditions of men. JMHO

 

[vanshan]

I'm sorry let's be exact. The New Testament was written by those in the Orthodox Church (or at that time simply the One Universal Apostolic Church). They wrote it under the inspiration of God, but they themselves were not possessed as Mohammed was when he wrote the Koran -- they observed God's works and wrote what they learned.

 

[SumTinWong]

I'm sorry let's be exact. The New Testament was written by those in the Orthodox Church (or at that time simply the One Universal Apostolic Church). They wrote it under the inspiration of God, but they themselves were not possessed as Mohammed was when he wrote the Koran -- they observed God's works and wrote what they learned.

Okay and you believe that because you belong to the Orthodox Church, so lets get that out of the way.

The RCC believes they are the first.

You both claim to be there from 33AD and since you both split apart in 1054, who exactly is the right one?

Could it be neither of you?

Your tradition says it was you. Theres says otherwise.

The NT was written by Peter, Paul, Luke, John, John Mark, etc... who were a part of the body of Christ (the Universal Church) who is the head. They did as you say write the Bible as inspired by God. They wrote what they learned. Why then if they knew that Mary was the greatest of all disciples, and that she was full of the grace of the Lord, did they not write this down? If it was common knowledge, where is the proof?

That is all I am asking for.

By the way the church can be wrong (so the reason that the orthodox church is the right one because it doesn't make mistakes is wrong). We are not perfect. Case in point Pauls' rebuking of the churches in that time(the galatians, ephesus, etc...), and his rebuking of Peter on how he acted with gentiles.

Do I think you are a part of the body? Yes I do in fact an important part. The only part, no.

 

[vanshan]

Well, you can sort through the issue to see whose claim is correct.

I was charimatic until my conversion in 1995 to Orthodoxy. I am not saying the Orthodox Church is the same Church because I want to legitimize my faith . . . I've studied the issues that have created many of the groups that have broken off from the original Church and I think my conclusion is logical and really self-evident if you read the canons of the early Church and the breaks that have occured over time.

For your benefit look into it yourself.

As I have stated before individuals in the Church make errors. Some have been big, but with the guidance of the Holy Spirit and with Jesus at our helm we have corrected those who have been wrong and been guided and preserved in the right belief and teachings of Christ.

 

[SumTinWong]

Well, you can sort through the issue to see whose claim is correct.

I was charimatic until my conversion in 1995 to Orthodoxy. I am not saying the Orthodox Church is the same Church because I want to legitimize my faith . . . I've studied the issues that have created many of the groups that have broken off from the original Church and I think my conclusion is logical and really self-evident if you read the canons of the early Church and the breaks that have occured over time.

For your benefit look into it yourself.

As I have stated before individuals in the Church make errors. Some have been big, but with the guidance of the Holy Spirit and with Jesus at our helm we have corrected those who have been wrong and been guided and preserved in the right belief and teachings of Christ.

I think that is an incredible leap from being a charismatic to becoming an orthodox. I would appreciate any advice on how you overcame the mary doctrines of both of your churches? What i mean is how did you come to except mary as so highly regarded if there was no scripture or apostles backing of it? Being a charismatic as you know, are mostly scripture first. So what pointed you in that direction? Man I am a a flood of questions....

 

[Daedalus]

Actually it is historical fact that the Bible was handed down to the prophets (moses, jeremiah, paul, peter, etc...), from God himself and put down on paper by those said prophets. The Torah existed well before the RCC and Orthodox churches. The Orthodox, and Catholic Church have no claim on authorship of any works of the Bible but can lay claim to assembling the Bible, and translating it into Latin. It was protestants that translated it further into German and English, which is what I read today.
None of us "sects" worship the Bible, we worship the God of the Bible. What we do is not follow the traditions of men.

Islam says it believes in the god of Avraham.
Does that make them right?
Noooo it doesn't.
It doesn't matter what you say you believe in.
If you really believe in Jesus Christ, then do what he taught you to do.
Take your cross, be the good samarinean just as Jesus taught.
"Why do you call me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do what I say?"
So the protestants translated it into German and English?
Big deal, they certainly didn't bother with romanian, russian, bulgarian and the list can go on and on.

You state with all veracity that it is a fact that Mary was grown up in a temple until the age of twelve. Proof? There isn't any. It is all tradition and heresay. You all say that Mary was the greatest of Jesus disciples.

What proof do you really want?
Perhaps some photos with Mary holding and id card "Mary , Mother of Jesus" ?
What proof do you have that Jesus existed?
The NT is still written by men, their testimonies.
I've told you allready the NT is not the only holy book; there are other holy books that speak about the lifes of the saints and about the early christianity.
"You all say that Mary was the greatest of Jesus disciples" -- that is so tipicall for the new sects -- I said Mary was greater than all saints, including the disciples of Jesus, not that Mary was a disciple of Jesus.

Well what about John the Baptist who while he was still in the wombs was filled with the Holy Ghost and who Jesus himself said:
Mat 11:11 Truly I say to you, Among those who have been born of women there has not risen a greater one than John the Baptist. But the least in the kingdom of Heaven is greater than he.

So who was the greatest again? And please don't say that John was not a disciple of Christ, He foretold and prophesied of the coming and baptized him. Jesus said among those born of women John was the greatest.

Well.... how about Jesus.
Jesus was greater than John as John himslef said; btw Jesus was also born from a woman.
And the 12 apostoles were greater than John, because the 12 apostoles will judge the nation of Islael, including John.
That makes at least 13 people greater than John.
Jesus said that about John because the apostoles had not fulfilled their mission yet while John had -- at that time, there was none greater than John.
How would Jesus have looked if he would have said "I am the first, then my mother then my apostoles and then John" (remember Judah was still his apostole then).
Further more, John said : "He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose. " .
The Virgin Mary carried Jesus for 9 months, she was worthy because of God's grace.
Again, shoe latchet and carying Him for 9 months... compare.

So if Mary was the greatest why isn't more written of her in the Bible? Why don't the gospel writers, and epistles elude to her more than a few lines that leave doubt in the minds of millions? Why wouldn't jesus himself have made mention of her as being the greatest? There are obscure stories of all kinds of people like that Jabez guy. But there is nothing in the NT that tells me what you say. I ask you to explain to me why?

That is why I don't believe in the traditions of men. JMHO

Again and again, the NT is one of the holy books.
The NT concearns the teachings of Jesus, not who is first among people.
Remember what Jesus said when he was asked about which one is the greatest of the apostoles.
He didn't give a direct answer because it was irelevant; what did it matter who was the greatest of them?
Anyway, Mary was greater than each one of them; even greater than any of the angels in heavens.
None of the angels was selected to bear Christ.
Think of how much God hated unclean things; read the OT and you will see.
If God chose Mary to bear his only Son it was because he filled her with unspoken grace; He made her holy so that his Son could be born through her.
Just contemplate on that -- the Son of God being born through a virgin.

 

[Kripost]

I was charimatic until my conversion in 1995 to Orthodoxy. I am not saying the Orthodox Church is the same Church because I want to legitimize my faith . . . I've studied the issues that have created many of the groups that have broken off from the original Church and I think my conclusion is logical and really self-evident if you read the canons of the early Church and the breaks that have occured over time.

Just a point to nitpick. Isn't the Orthodox Church a charismatic church? I don't think the Holy Spirit has ever left Her.

 

[SumTinWong]

I know Mary is the mother of Jesus.

You tell me something that I do not know(that she was in the temple until 12) and I ask you to prove it to me. I tell you that I think if it was that important it would have been included in the words that the Apostles, and prophets wrote down.

So if the NT is not the only Holy book then don't be shy point out the info man. If you are so sure that it is real and true point it out. You are the one claiming authorship of the bible, why then did you guys leave these other works out?

I know Jesus was born of a woman but I also know that He was God. Fully man, Fully God. That seperated Him from the rest. And you said it yourself that John(at the time Jesus said it), was greater than the rest. That meant Mary too. Obviously if he was the greatest then Mary could not have been. Or are you calling Jesus a liar?

If Mary was just below the angels what does that make John then? The miracle is that Jesus chose a virgin and brought this child, God himself into the world using a normal human being. If she had been altered in anyway, she would not have been of the seed of David and therefore the prophecy would have been wrong.

 

[Veritas]

We all as one submit to Christ because He first loved us and died for us. In a good marriage the woman is subjct to the man because his love for her would also be unto death.
The mistake we make is that we try to take what applies to a woman in marriage and apply it to women in the Church - the two are different
Now when it comes to a bishop (pastor) being the "husband of one woman" etc. this is a character reference / social safeguard issue - not a law. (Not only does it omit women in that instance but also single men)

:topic:

Tas, why do you insist on reading into scripture that which does not exist? You keep referring to "the husband of one woman (wife)", but interpret it incorrectly. It does not say the bishop must be married. It only says that if he is, he can only have one wife as opposed to 2 or 3 or however many he wishes. This was a direct prohibition of the pagan practices (not to mention OT) of the time. Sheesh.

 

[TasManOfGod]

:topic:

Tas, why do you insist on reading into scripture that which does not exist? You keep referring to "the husband of one woman (wife)", but interpret it incorrectly. It does not say the bishop must be married. It only says that if he is, he can only have one wife as opposed to 2 or 3 or however many he wishes. This was a direct prohibition of the pagan practices (not to mention OT) of the time. Sheesh.

So you are saying women can be bishops by this verse are you?

 

[Veritas]

Jesus didn't lay traps......

Psalms 141:9 MKJV
[ 9 ] Keep me from the traps which they have laid for me, and the snares of the workers of evil.



Well good for you guys. Different strokes for different folks. I praise God in the manner I see fit and the manner that pleases Him. For me to try to do something else just b/c someone else tells me to is not true praise, reverence, and worship. It starts in the heart.

No church is the final authority for me and never will be.



Adam knew God said no.
Genesis 2:16-17 MKJV
[ 16 ] And Jehovah God commanded the man, saying, You may freely eat of every tree in the garden,
[ 17 ] but you shall not eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. For in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.

Adam knew God said no, so he made that decision fully aware of what God said. Don't blame it on the woman. They both knew that God said no.



That is REALLY reaching. It does not say that anywhere in the Bible. Scripture references are definitely needed to support that reasoning.



I never disrespected any of the people mentioned in the Bible that were in Jesus' direct lineage. But I don't pray to or worship Mary, Paul, or anyone else. The Bible doesn't teach me that. It teaches me about the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. And that 'new sect' stuff... I don't really believe in the sect stuff. I first and foremost follow Jesus Christ and the Bible. Other than that, I rely on the Holy Spirit and God for my leadership.. and when He sends people my way, it is confirmed by the Holy Spirit. You won't find me saying, "Well my church says this and this is right"... No. Because the church is fallible just as man is.



I don't do that

Out of curiosity, how is your relationship to your earthly father, JAI? How has it been since your birth?

 

[Veritas]

So you are saying women can be bishops by this verse are you?

No, and you know it...at least I hope so.

 

[J.A.I]

Out of curiosity, how is your relationship to your earthly father, JAI? How has it been since your birth?

Question - Where did that come from, and what does that have to do with anything ? Tell me that, and I will answer you...

 

[TasManOfGod]

No, and you know it...at least I hope so.

Then why are you saying the verse quotation is "off topic"

 

[FreeinChrist]

I will first say though, I see no reason a woman to spread the word of Christ outside the chruch, to non-believers, direct them to church.

? Not sure if you meant this as you wrote it.

God has called many women to spread the word of Christ in the world. I have known many missionaries who are women and have read of some who God used mightily to spread His word. Corrie Ten Boom comes to mind. And there was an Isabel ___ (can't remember her last name) who was a missionary to China, prerevolution (China's that is). Many have been led to do some rather wonderful things in Christ's name.
And interesting enough...many of those churches who say the women should be quiet sure depend on women to teach Sunday School, or other classes!

Now, the reasons are some of these (perhaps more I don't know of):
-Eve was the one who made Adam sin (it was Adam who sinned but Eve who made him sin )

And it seems alot of men have dodged responsibility ever since!!!
Adam took the fruit and ate it - his choice, with full knowledge of what God's instruction was.

-it is by the old law and the new law, literrally, forbittened that any human blood to be shed in the house of God (the church) -- women in orthodox churches are still adviced not to enter the church in a particular time of the month. It is a literal interprepation.

Literal interpretation of what New Testament verse? I've seen the rules as laid down under the Old Covenant...but the New?
And I see a reason not to join an Orthodox church.

- God throughout the history chose to send his message through men ; sometimes through women, but very, very rarely.

But He did...and has used women since to spread his word.

If Jesus wanted women to spread His word, He would have chosen some as his apostoles but He did not do so.

Well, that is faulty application IMHO. He chose the men He needed to do the job, and within the OT law as was established. He has chosen women to be missionaries. Seems God can use those who are willing.