Paula White-Cain likens spiritual warfare in White House to 'absolute hell' in resurfaced sermon: 'I'm in the arena'

"Trump spiritual adviser Pastor Paula White-Cain claimed that saying no to President Donald Trump is the same thing as “saying no to God”" (link)

Or what about the time she compared Trump to Jesus?

"“Jesus taught so many lessons through his death, burial and resurrection. He showed us great leadership, great transformation requires great sacrifice. And Mr President, no one has paid the price like you have paid the price. It almost cost you your life. You were betrayed and arrested and falsely accused. It’s a familiar pattern that our lord and savior showed us." (link)

Consider the source... She's part of the problem in my opinion lol

Paula White as Trump's spiritual advisor, should be calling Trump to repentance for his, bullying, immorality, using the evangelicals for his own agenda, for his self-perception as a 'Christ figure' and all his other sins. Instead, she feeds his large ego with flattery and blatant lies. She is, indeed, part of the problem in the White House.

No Paula it is not 'absolute hell'. No-one on this earth has yet experienced that and, praise God, those of us who have accepted Jesus as their Saviour won't have to.

rebornfree said:

No Paula it is not 'absolute hell'. No-one on this earth has yet experienced that and, praise God, those of us who have accepted Jesus as their Saviour won't have to.

Click to expand...

You wrote, ' those of us who have accepted Jesus as their Saviour won't have to.'

Saving faith is not the act of a moment, but rather an attitude of a life time.
The New Testament affirms that eternal life in Christ is our present possession only on the condition of present living faith, rather than as the irrevocable consequence of a moment's act of faith, sometime in the past.

Jeff Carr said:

You wrote, ' those of us who have accepted Jesus as their Saviour won't have to.'

Saving faith is not the act of a moment, but rather an attitude of a life time.
The New Testament affirms that eternal life in Christ is our present possession only on the condition of present living faith, rather than as the irrevocable consequence of a moment's act of faith, sometime in the past.

Click to expand...

That is a subject debated often on CF.

Perhaps I could have phrased it better. My point was that she was using the word 'hell' to refer to something earthly instead of what it really means.

No "sermon" from a Biblically unqualified "pastor" like Paula.

Tom8907 said:

No "sermon" from a Biblically unqualified "pastor" like Paula.

Click to expand...

Not that I support her in any way, but 'unqualified'? Because she is a woman?

Jeff Carr said:

Not that I support her in any way, but 'unqualified'? Because she is a woman?

Click to expand...

Majority of people take Paul's writings about leadership qualifications and he doesnt allow women to be above a man, out of historical (and literal) context and say no woman is allowed to be a leader. But then they have no answer as to why Paul promoted Phoebe, a woman, in the book of Roman's and used the same title for her that he gives himself. Which is someone who establishes churches. So you can appoint leadership for a brand new church you start which means youre above the male leaders because you have to guide and correct them at the start, but cant be a leader of the church itself? OK then...

Delvianna said:

Majority of people take Paul's writings about leadership qualifications and he doesnt allow women to be above a man, out of historical (and literal) context and say no woman is allowed to be a leader. But then they have no answer as to why Paul promoted Phoebe, a woman, in the book of Roman's and used the same title for her that he gives himself. Which is someone who establishes churches. So you can appoint leadership for a brand new church you start which means youre above the male leaders because you have to guide and correct them at the start, but cant be a leader of the church itself? OK then...

Click to expand...

Paul said that 'in Christ' there is neither male or female. Now, complementarians use all sorts of exegetical maneuvers to tell us that Paul didn't mean what he so obviously said. And that is, that the distinctions society makes, Jew/Gentile/, slave/free, male/female do not exist 'in Christ' and therefore not in the Church. The taking of a few verses that Paul addresses as local issues and making them universal requirements to oppress women, is not just an error but a terrible sin.

Jeff Carr said:

Paul said that 'in Christ' there is neither male or female. Now, complementarians use all sorts of exegetical maneuvers to tell us that Paul didn't mean what he so obviously said. And that is, that the distinctions society makes, Jew/Gentile/, slave/free, male/female do not exist 'in Christ' and therefore not in the Church. The taking of a few verses that Paul addresses as local issues and making them universal requirements to oppress women, is not just an error but a terrible sin.

Click to expand...

100% agreed

Jeff Carr said:

Not that I support her in any way, but 'unqualified'? Because she is a woman?

Click to expand...

Yeah. Might want to give 1st Timothy 3 a read.

Tom8907 said:

Yeah. Might want to give 1st Timothy 3 a read.

Click to expand...

Yeah, have read it many times. If one reads it from the Greek, it is plain that Paul is giving a direction to the local situation of Ephesus.

Tom8907 said:

Yeah. Might want to give 1st Timothy 3 a read.

Click to expand...

Due to Roman culture and the main religion (Temple of Artemis), Paul was correcting the local issues, not establishing forever rules for everyone. Men and womens behavior in Ephesus was a serious problem. Society taught that men had absolute power in the household which led to a lot of authoritarian leadership. The culture also promoted promiscuity, so they married multiple women. So Paul was addressing men who had intellectual arrogance and misused their status in both the household and religion. This is why Paul flips the idea and teaches, self control, service, restraint and humility because the society was a male dominated society that was abusing their power. That is the central theme across the whole letter.

Then when you get to the verse that says, "And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence." The greek word that is translated as authority is authenteō which actually means to usurp authority, not that they can't have authority in general. So again, the same problem of dominating leadership, but this time Paul addresses the women doing it. (Christianity allowed women leadership, so I'm sure some women seized the opportunity. There are several examples of women leadership in general which Paul himself honors.) The word "silence" is hēsychia which means to not mettle in others affairs. Which is not talking about not speaking.

You have to look at culture/historical context otherwise the last verse of the chapter, if you're going to take the chapter word for word literally without any context...
"Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing"
Means salvation comes through having kids and not Christ (And it cannot be talking about Christ since Christ already came and died on the cross). Obviously that can't be the case... study with this stuff is paramount.

But with any leader, look at their teachings and from what I see about Paula White, there's a lot of issues...

I like what General William Booth (founder of Salvation Army) once said about a difficult work, 'Send the woman, she is the best man for the job'.