bible-truths.com/forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Need Account Help?  Email bibletruths.forum@gmail.com   

Forgotten password reminders does not work. Contact the email above and state what you want your password changed to. (it must be at least 8 characters)

Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Ray's Teachings - Women in the Church?  (Read 7643 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Deborah-Leigh

  • Guest
Re: Ray's Teachings - Women in the Church?
« Reply #20 on: November 19, 2006, 10:39:11 AM »

Hi Layla

Your comment : this thread is not about the rightful place for a man and a woman in the flesh, but about whether woman should teach.

and your statement to me  : I think you are misunderstanding what Doug has written.

and your "assurance" that : I do test the spirit behind every teaching and I would never offer anything here that has not been tested.

My responce.......

I will comment on this teaching through the transcript with my comments in blue.

1Ti 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence

Greetings To All

The problem of whether a woman should or should not teach or hold a position that reflects anything other than being a silent submissive member is looked upon differently amongst the many different denominations.

 Irrelevant. This opening comment camouflages the content of the following teaching by obscuring the fact that the scripture does not lie.  Gods word is not made less or more true based on or subject to popularity vote or different interpretations or the many different denominations.

(Like wearing a hat) Within the scriptures we have several women used of God to further His Will on earth.

Incorrect. Here the author mixes up the WILL of God with the PLAN of God.Case in point : Esther. God did not have to use Esther, or the burning bush or a talking donkey to further His WILL on earth. Esther, the burning bush and the donkey were all part of Gods PLAN. God doesn’t use humans, bushes or donkeys to get to His Will. He causes circumstances, He authors circumstances to create His Plan and then humans bushes and donkeys live out that plan.  In a e-mail response by Ray FREE WILL he responds, quote “ distinguish between God’s “will”….and God’s “plan” to achieve His “Will”. God’s Will…live righteously….His plan….first live Unrighteously….to be humbled in our utter inability to do God’s perfect will…..repent of our wickedness.  Understand….we sin from our hearts, so it is only right and good that we should be punished….. and…. converted into the Image of God’s Son.”

 In the OT had Queen Esther not pleaded with the King to reverse his decision

NO….no….no….had Queen Esther not been CAUSED BY GOD to plead with the King….and thereafter had God not CAUSED the King to reverse his decision….is more like it. That the plan of God was written for a woman is secondary to the fact that God wrote and caused His  Plan to include both men and women that God wrote from start to finish.
 based on the testimony of an evil man, the entire Jewish nation under his command would have put to death. Here Doug puts Queen Esther on the pedestal and not God….because the difference between Gods will and Gods plan is not discerned. This error is what happens when man tries to idolise men or women above God. This error happens when human understanding over looks Gods Sovereignty. This error manifests when human heroes and heroines are given supremacy above Gods Sovereign place


Obviously in this instance the voice of a woman was far better than the words of a man…

.....Since when is the voice of a woman far better than the words of a man?….Is it..…since the man did not represent God’s Will for His chosen people. Where? Where does scripture say this? Show me one place! Give me the second witness to this man made heresy. Okay okay I hear you….What about Abigail then?…..Again NO…..no. The Scripture is not literal. Abigail submitted to the King. As a result she saved her husband who later died .Does this mean women are superior to men if the man “did not represent God’s will for His chosen people”…Oh…so then women are superior to all Men save Jesus Christ by implication and this is not scritural it is heresy. . Which man or woman REPRESENTS God’s will? There is one Mediator and that is Christ. The birth, life, death and resurrection were all part of God’s Plan in which Jesus Christ was always in Gods Will(sinless and never deviating once from right standing with God)  as God’s plan came to pass. God uses HIS PLAN to achieve HIS WILL. This is no less true for Jesus as it is for us. The men and women of Scripture all illustrate God’s plan.  [/color]

who did not represent God’s Will for His chosen people. Who is to say that a woman today should not speak for the Will of God

what heresy is this? Which woman can speak for the Will of God? Oh yes, I know. Jezebel and the Harlot, Mystery Babylon!…when a man speaks and teaches against God’s Will? When a man speaks and teaches against God’s Will then he is still in God’s plan. Pharaoh resisted God’s will. That was God’s plan. 

However I believe in strict adherence to the laws for determining truth

TWELVE GOD-GIVEN TRUTHS TO UNDERSTAND HIS WORD"None of the wicked shall understand; but the Wise shall understand" (Daniel 12:10) TRUTH NUMBER 6[A] "…that in the mouth of TWO OR THREE WITNESSES every word may be established" (Matt. 18:16). "…In the mouth of TWO OR THREE WITNESSES shall every word be established" (II Cor. 13:1).[C] "And I will give power unto my TWO WITNESSES…" (Rev. 11:3).This particular law of Scripture is constantly violated. We are to have at least a second witness to establish a Scriptural truth or doctrine. Unfortunately, the Church does not follow this truth of God in establishing doctrine. Truth be known, orthodoxy has not even one witness to support any of their doctrines!

and when I look for a second witness that states that a “woman should not teach” I find some problems finding a second witness. Any wonder that problems are encountered? When we look for another scripture that speaks against a woman teaching we find one but it is directed against a woman who is evil and not qualified to teach.


Rev 2:20 Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.

This verse certainly does nothing to keep a good woman from teaching..

the deduction here is that a “good” woman can teach a man who is not in the Will of God? Where does scripture say this? Show me…..…..

 so we need to look further. In the 5th chapter of 1st Timothy we find a lot said about woman in the church not being considered worthy of ministering the things of God. However once again we see that these unqualified woman have grown weak in their faith and “some have already turned aside after Satan”. Once again we are still lacking a reason for a woman of God to be denied the right to teach God’s Word

 No. Wrong again. What is lacking is not a reason but the authority and a scripture that gives women rights to usurp man as head and authority just as Christ is Head of His Church. There is no such scripture that says woman has the right to supplant men and become their authority or to  teach men. Women can be messengers. John 4 : 16 Jesus said to her “Go, call your husband and come back here.”   Mark 16 : 5 and going into the tomb, they saw a young man sitting there on the right side, clothed in a long, stately, sweeping robe of white, and they were utterly amazed and struck with terror. And he said to them…..7 Go your way, tell the disciples and Peter that He goes before you into Galilee. 8. …and they went and said nothing about it to anyone including to any man, for they were afraid. Now Jesus having risen….appeared first to Mary Magdalene…..10. She went and reported it.

I see no  teaching in these scriptures that licence woman to lead or teach men.  Christ is always the Head as is man the head of the woman.
 

In 1st Tim 2 there is a reference in verse 13 to Eve who bowed in subjection to Satan just as in the 5th chapter so I question the quality of this woman that is to be silent rather than her gender. Eve is not the woman who represents the church and who is at enmity (an enemy) with Satan. Eve was not at enmity with Satan because she was in compliance with him and was part of the transgression.

Then there is another scripture to consider (amongst others) before one states that a woman is not qualified to teach the scriptures because of her gender. Woman is not qualified to teach the scriptures to men not because of her gender but because of Gods order.

Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Not only does the above verse state there is no difference between a man and a woman in Christ,….what does IN CHRIST mean to Doug….here is the twist…. it also helps to nullify  Eph 5: 24 as a reason not to permit women to preach…there it is. In Christ for Doug means helping to nullify the scripture that does not licence or permit women to preach! 

 because it essentially says the same thing.

So in conclusion there are no two witnesses that say a woman who is qualified should not teach,…

this is unscriptural nonsense!


 consequently a woman cannot lawfully be denied the pulpit …

.Lawfully? Denied? Now are we to conclude that God has Unlawfully Denied women the right to teach men. Are we to agree with this outrageous conclusion that by implication puts God before the Grand  Jury of a man made legal system of evaluation of Gods supreme Sovereignty and WILL. Contrary to one thinking that there are two lawful witnesses that deny woman the right to teach, the scriptures show there is no difference between a man or a woman ….Where? WHERE do the scriptures SHOW there is no difference between a man or a woman….Oh in Christ….Here in lies the error. In Christ does not mean as Christ it means like Christ, not metamorphosised into a genderless thing that then looses identity as a brother or sister, Son or Daughter of God.  as they are both of Him…Yes. True.  Both male and female we are made and considered equal. ….Yes….equal for we share an inheritance equally,  but we are NOT the same. One is the weaker vessel and one is the head over the other as Christ is Head over His Church.

There is one big however though. As Paul says some things may be lawful but are not expedient to pursue and this may apply here in certain circumstances. 

This is a false cunning argument. 2 Peter 3 : 16 …there are come things that are difficult to understand which the ignorant and unstable twist and misconstrue to their own utter destruction, just as they distort and interpret the rest of the Scriptures. 17. Let me warn you therefore, beloved (Layla) that knowing these things beforehand, you should be on your guard, lest you be carried away by the error of lawless and wicked persons and fall from your own present firm condition, your own steadfastness of mind. But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To Him be glory both now and for ever. Amen…..

If a woman preaching is a problem because she is a woman, then she should either preach somewhere else or refrain from doing so where she is. Plus she had might as well go somewhere where she will be appreciated.

 This is a false cunning argument. 2 Peter 3 : 16 …there are come things that are difficult to understand which the ignorant and unstable twist and misconstrue to their own utter destruction, just as they distort and interpret the rest of the Scriptures. 17. Let me warn you therefore, beloved (Layla) that knowing these things beforehand, you should be on your guard, lest you be carried away by the error of lawless and wicked persons and fall from your own present firm condition, your own steadfastness of mind. But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To Him be glory both now and for ever. Amen…..


Now all of the above proves that there is no scriptural mandate against woman teaching or holding positions of authority in the church

This is a false cunning argument. 2 Peter 3 : 16 …there are come things that are difficult to understand which the ignorant and unstable twist and misconstrue to their own utter destruction, just as they distort and interpret the rest of the Scriptures. 17. Let me warn you therefore, beloved (Layla) that knowing these things beforehand, you should be on your guard, lest you be carried away by the error of lawless and wicked persons and fall from your own present firm condition, your own steadfastness of mind. But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To Him be glory both now and for ever. Amen…..

because of the lack of witnesses in the scriptures. However since on the surface (and for the unlearned) there appears to be so, we need to consider why this is so. Once again I urge you to look deeper and consider the spirit/ soul implication that is at the heart of the message seemingly indicating that woman should be forbidden to teach.

This is a false cunning argument. 2 Peter 3 : 16 …there are come things that are difficult to understand which the ignorant and unstable twist and misconstrue to their own utter destruction, just as they distort and interpret the rest of the Scriptures. 17. Let me warn you therefore, beloved (Layla) that knowing these things beforehand, you should be on your guard, lest you be carried away by the error of lawless and wicked persons and fall from your own present firm condition, your own steadfastness of mind. But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To Him be glory both now and for ever. Amen…..

God is Spirit. His word is spirit and we need to stop thinking in the natural if we are to move forward in our understanding. With all the spiritual references in the Bible it amazes me that “qualified teachers” look for everything in the natural. Man is a spirit (aka image of God) within an earth suit and when he is given a soul (spiritual body) in the likeness of God, then God’s purpose for His Creation will be complete and the “Mystery of Godliness” will have been fulfilled within man.

Peace and Blessings
Doug.

 

« Last Edit: November 19, 2006, 03:58:25 PM by Arcturus »
Logged

athisfeet

  • Guest
Re: Ray's Teachings - Women in the Church?
« Reply #21 on: November 19, 2006, 03:58:57 PM »

Hi Rocky,

Long time no see, how have you been? It is good to see you here.

In regard to what you wrote above;

Our lives are very short, just a vapor, our salvation should come before our marriage, our families, our friends, but if your spouse is not a stumbling block you should not divorce her or ignore her needs.

We are only conceived in the spirit as of now, our minds are to put away carnal, fleshly thoughts but we are not transformed into true spiritual beings yet, can any of us here or do you know anyone who fits this description?

John 3:8  The wind bloweth where it listeth and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

We are earnestly awaiting our transformation, we are not there until the resurrection.

Rom 8:23  And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.



His Peace and Wisdom to you,

Joe



Joe,

I'm not sure what you are saying here.  ???

That entire passage is about being born of the spirit, being born again. Do you think that Jesus was saying that we are not born again or born of the spirit while in this body of flesh? That we must first die PHYSICALLY?

Don't we either walk in the flesh OR walk in the spirit?

Here are some of the preceding verses in that chapter. Is Jesus telling Nicodemus about something that is NOT going to happen until after he dies physically? It seems very clear to me that Nicodemus understood that this must happen while in the flesh. Why else would he have wondered about it? Why would he have asked about re-entering the womb of our mothers? And if he was just misunderstanding what Jesus was saying then why didn't Jesus correct him by simply telling that this would NOT be accomplished while in the flesh?

Joh 3:3-8  Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born? Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit[/b].

If you are saying that we must DIE PHYSICALLY in order to be born again (of the spirit) then you are saying that none of us can see the kingdom of God, for we MUST be BORN AGAIN in order to see the kingdom of God.

You seem to believe that that last verse is talking about us (physically). Am I misunderstanding?

To me, it tells us HOW we are "born again" (BY THE SPIRIT).

I don't think the translator worded it right or clearly enough.

Look at the words:

Joh 3:8  The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so  [houtōin; in this way (referring to what precedes or follows)] is [esti; is] every one [pas; all, any, every, the whole] that is born [gennaō; to procreate] of the Spirit.

It seems clear to me that this verse is talking about the spirit and HOW we are born again… not the condition that we are in physically (as in invisible spirits) when we are born again.

The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell when it cometh, and whither it goeth: IN THIS WAY is everyone BORN OF THE SPIRIT.

It is BY THE SPIRIT that we are "born again" or "born of the spirit". 

Are you are saying that we are not born again or born of the spirit while in the flesh? And is that what Ray teaches and believes?

That seems very foreign to me and to what Jesus was saying (as I understand it) and to what the scriptures tell us about the flesh vs the spirit and the inner man vs the outer man, etc. My goodness, that just does not sit right with my spirit or with how I understand the word of God.

Sin is condemned in the flesh; as he is so are we IN THIS WORLD; His spirit quickens our MORTAL bodies; etc, etc, etc. Christ came to give us LIFE. The ONLY way we can have that LIFE is to be baptized into his DEATH (NOW) and be "born again" of the spirit.

So to say that we are not born again or born of the spirit while in this flesh, that that doesn’t happen until after we die, seems to go completely against the word of God and the entire POINT that Christ was making, not to mention the words of Paul and the other disciples.


As Rocky said (and as I also understand it), we are NOT in the flesh but in the spirit IF the spirit of God dwells in us; those "in the flesh" CANNOT PLEASE GOD. So are you sure you want to insist that we ARE "still in the flesh" just because we still have this body of death (as Paul called it)?  Is that hearing what the SPIRIT is saying to those who are WALKING IN THE SPIRIT?

Rom 8:1-15  There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.  For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. (so are we still in the flesh?) But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. (no! not if the spirit of God dwells in us. Isn't that what this says?) Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.  But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you. Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live. For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.

We cannot cry ABBA, FATHER except through the SPIRIT of the SON that is IN US. Are you saying that we cannot and do not do that while in the flesh?

We must pass from death unto life, right? Do we not do that until after we die? That cannot be.

But so to not get too far off topic, since the topic is women and teaching... how might this (being in the flesh vs in the spirit) relate to what Paul said about husbands and wives (not simply men and women):

Paul very clearly said that he was talking about Christ and the church (not husbands and wives after the flesh), didn't he?

Eph 5:32-33  This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband[/u].

Paul was not addressing men and women after the flesh; if he was, then who is the single woman or the widowed woman "subject" to?

Paul was using the marriage relationship that was established by God in the beginning to show us THE SPIRITUAL TRUTH BEHIND IT. Adam (male) was formed FIRST, THEN Eve (female - from Adam) and then they were JOINED TOGETHER and made ONE FLESH.

CHRIST FIRST, THEN the CHURCH; the HEAD FIRST, THEN the BODY.

Those who are still "in the flesh", minding the things of the flesh may have only been able to hear what Paul was saying in terms of the FLESH (applying it to husbands and wives after the flesh), but aren't we supposed to be able to discern what the SPIRIT of the Word is? Christ said that HIS WORDS are SPIRIT AND TRUTH.

IF the SPIRIT of God dwells IN US and we are born "of the spirit"... then are we still "in the flesh"? (Paul says no.) Are we still "male and female" or are we ONE FLESH?

Is God a RESPECTOR OF PERSONS? Or is man?

Are we (even though male and female after the flesh) not joined together as ONE FLESH; ONE BODY with ONE HEAD through the SPIRIT?

So are we now to look at these verses after the flesh (husbands and wives)? rather than after the spirit (Christ and the church)? To say that we are "still in the flesh"?

I pray (God willing) I am NOT still in the flesh to mind the things of the flesh.

If the spirit of God dwells IN ME, then it is not "me" (whether I be male or female after the flesh) who speaks but it is the WORD OF GOD that is IN ME that speaks; it is the SON doing THE WILL OF THE FATHER who is SPEAKING (AND DOING).

Even MEN are the BRIDE (female) of Christ and WOMEN are still SONS (male) of God.

Can we not see that MEN AND WOMEN (after the flesh) fall into BOTH of these categories?

I will be extremely shocked if you tell me that neither you nor Ray (nor most of those here) believes that we are born again until after we die. I have been readling here for a long time and I never realized that to be the case, if it is.

athisfeet
Logged

Deborah-Leigh

  • Guest
Re: Ray's Teachings - Women in the Church?
« Reply #22 on: November 19, 2006, 04:37:59 PM »

Hello Athisfeet

Please excuse and forgive me jumping in ahead here Joe.....Africa time :D

Athisfeet, Joe wrote in a thread discussion  : in the world as men and woman, in the church as brothers and sisters, in His Kingdom as Sons and Daughters. Each step closer, as we grow in our One on one journey with Him together.

I know you have addressed your post to Joe.....I only hope this insight he has already shared helps clear up things a little before Joe replys to you too.

We either do not understand, or we do not believe or we do not agree. We need to know where we stand. And we can only know with God's help. We can only come out of not understanding, disbelief and disagreement by God dragging us away from what we have learnt in Mystery Babylon.

Mercy Grace and unmerited favour to you

Arcturus  :)
Logged

athisfeet

  • Guest
Re: Ray's Teachings - Women in the Church?
« Reply #23 on: November 19, 2006, 06:47:09 PM »

Arcturus,

I don’t think I understand what you are saying. I am assuming that you are addressing being “born again”? (If not, then please correct me.)

What do you understand Joe to be saying in that quote, that we are not “sons and daughters” now? We are only “brothers and sisters”?

How is that supported scripturally?

What does “in His kingdom” mean to you? Is that something that doesn’t happen until after we die physically? Are we not “in His kingdom” until then? How does that relate to the fact that the kingdom of God is within?

Jesus said that we MUST BE “born again” in order to see the kingdom of God. What I gathered was that Joe was saying that we are NOT YET “born again” (or “born of the spirit”) and we WILL NEVER BE (while in the flesh) because we are not like the wind (invisible, coming and going, etc).

If that is what he is saying and that is in alignment with what is taught by Ray then what does that mean? That we cannot “see” the kingdom of God? And that we won’t be able to see the kingdom of God until after we die? Because that is when we are "born again"?

I have a really hard time believing that that is what Jesus meant by being “born again”, of being “born of the spirit”.

Aren’t we “born of the spirit” BY THE SPIRIT that dwells IN US?

How does saying that we aren't born again while in the flesh line up with what Peter said about being “born again”?

1Pe 1:22-23  Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart ferventlyBeing born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

Was Peter talking about something that happens after we physically die? It is my understanding that Peter is saying that if we love one another with a pure heart, we ARE “born again”. Born of the spirit, by the word of God (that incorruptible seed) that is in us? Do you understand these verses differently?

I’m sorry, but I must still be missing something here because I don’t see how we wait until after we die (physically) to be born again. Neither do I see that that is how Jesus, Peter or Paul (or anyone else) applied those words.

If we are not NOW “sons” of God then how is it that “as he is so are we IN THIS WORLD”. How does his spirit quicken our MORTAL BODIES if we are not “quickened” while IN THEM? If Paul said: “Ye are NOT IN THE FLESH if so be that the spirit of God dwell in you”, then are we “still in the flesh”? At the very same time he also said that “THOSE IN THE FLESH CANNOT PLEASE GOD”.

I understand what it means to be carnally MINDED or spiritually MINDED, but that doesn’t address everything that Paul said and what other verses of scripture tell us and what I quoted above from Peter that says that we ARE “born again” (even now).

Christ said that his words are to SPIRITUALLY discerned. Doesn’t that include Paul’s words and Peter’s (etc)?

If those "in the flesh" cannot please God then we say “we are no longer in the flesh but in the spirit" (mentally), but when it comes to being “born again” or “born of the spirit” we say that we can't be (yet) because we are "still in the flesh" (physically) and not like the wind??

What about what Peter said then? Why are we applying the word differently under different circumstances? That doesn't seem consistent (or right) to me.

If Christ’s words are SPIRIT and they are to be SPIRITUALLY discerned then why would we ever look at them in relation to the (physical) flesh?

Physically we are still in the flesh, yes. What does that mean if “the flesh profits nothing”? Spiritually speaking, we are NOT in the flesh… so, again, please help me understand why we are to be looking at the flesh to be applying these words NATURALLY instead of SPIRITUALLY?

Is that “rightly dividing” the word?

And if Paul said that he was speaking about Christ and the church (in talking about wives being subject to their husbands) then why do WE want to apply those words NATURALLY to “husbands and wives” after the flesh?

I’m not trying to argue; I’m just trying to understand. In ALL that I have read of Ray’s I never understood him to say that we are not born again until after we physically die. So if that is what he believes then that is new information to me. I either missed it or misunderstood what he was saying or meaning. But I don’t recall ever reading anything that said that. 

To say that we are not "born again" until after we physically die goes against what I believe and what I believe Jesus was telling Nicodemus and against what Peter said (as I understand it) and what Paul taught (again, as I understand it).

This is not something that I learned "in Babylon". I never even understood or used the term "born again" when I was still going to "church".

I am saying that it was always my understanding that Ray taught that we are "born again" BY THE SPIRIT, by CHRIST IN YOU. So if that is not so, then I misunderstood some of what Ray is teaching. But that being said doesn't change my mind. As it still seems perfectly clear to me that what I THOUGHT Ray believed and was teaching is the "truth" (so far as it has been given to me by God). I believe that we are "born of the spirit" BY THE SPIRIT OF GOD IN US and that this happens while we are "still in the flesh" (naturally speaking)... based on all of the scriptures that I posted and referenced (and many many more)

But I do appreciate your reply.  :D

athisfeet
Logged

Kat

  • Guest
Re: Ray's Teachings - Women in the Church?
« Reply #24 on: November 19, 2006, 08:50:53 PM »

 
Hi athisfeet,

I found this in Ray's emails.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resurrection
« on: September 12, 2006, 11:12:27 AM » 

> Hi Ray, quick question. Im struggling with the first resurrection. I hear so
> many conflicting ideas. Is it a spiritual resurrection, as in to be born again,
> Or is it only when Christ returns.
>
> Wesley


Dear Wesley:
When all else fails read and believe the Scriptures:
 
"So also is the resurrection of the dead.  It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory:  it is sown in weakness it is raised in power: It is sown a natural body; it is raised a SPIRITUAL BODY. There is a NATURAL body, and there is a SPIRITUAL body"  (I Cor. 15:42-45)
 
When it says "spiritual" it does not mean "physical."

Now this I say, brethren, that FLESH AND BLOOD [that's natural; that's physical] CANNOT inherit the kingdom of God; neither does corruption inherit incorruption.
 
Whereas John 3:3 in the King James says "born again," it would better translated "begotten anew from above."  In the Greek there is but one word for both "begotten and born."  Only the context can separate the proper use. At present the Elect Saints of  God have only the "earnest" of our full spiritual birth into His Kingdom:  "...ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of PROMISE [a promise of a future fulfilment] Which is the EARNEST of our inheritance UNTIL the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of His glory"  (Eph. 1:13-14).
 
I covered this in our Mobile Bible Conference last week. You should have been there.
God be with you,
Ray
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You can find the audio for the Mobile Bible Conference at 'Introductions and Announcements'.

mercy, peace, and love
Kat


Logged

athisfeet

  • Guest
Re: Ray's Teachings - Women in the Church?
« Reply #25 on: November 19, 2006, 10:40:38 PM »

Hello Kat:

I am not saying that the natural is the spiritual. That was my whole point. That we must look at these things SPIRITUALLY. We can be "in the flesh (naturally) and yet "not in the flesh" (spiritually).

We do not have to "take off" the flesh to "put on" the spirit do we? Isn't that the point that Paul was making when he said that we do NOT desire to be UNCLOTHED, but to be CLOTHED UPON?

Only Christ is IMMORTAL and INCORRUPTIBLE, so when we are clothed (by/with Christ) doesn't this mortal "put on" immortality and this corruption "put on" incorruption? Isn't that how we are "raised" to LIFE? Baptized into Christ's DEATH and resurrected into his LIFE? Maybe I am looking at those verses differntly from you (and Ray)? But I try to look at ALL of the scriptures spiritually and not naturally. Isn't that what we are supposed to do? I thought that was what Ray taught, that the scriptures are to be spiritually discerned?

For example, Christ defined the “dead” as those who “have no life in them” (those not partaking of HIS flesh and HIS blood), right? So now when I read the scriptures that talk about the “dead”, I try to keep that in mind and apply those verses spiritually, rather than naturally, to see what I can garner from a spiritual perspective.

Isn’t it that we understand the things that are not seen (spiritual) by looking at the things that are seen (natural)?

So in the OT when it says "the dead know not anything", we can look at that after the flesh (which is the only way that some will ever look at it) and say that those who are physically dead and buried in a physical grave of dirt "know not anything". But isn't there a spiritual application that is much more important and much more relevant (spiritually)? Isn't it true that "the (spiritually) dead know not anything"? See what I mean?

This "body" (which Paul called a body of death) is likened to a "grave"; the Pharisees were "full of dead men's bones", the throat is an “open sepulcher”….etc, etc. That is what I mean by “rightly dividing” the word (and I thought that was what Ray meant as well… looking at the word of God spiritually and not naturally (“after the flesh”). Maybe I am wrong and I am going about this the wrong way, but it sure has opened up a lot of things to me spiritually that I never could see or understand before.

But this is getting off topic as the thread was really about women teaching, though I think this is related to the topic of men and women (or husbands and wives) as I think that maybe that relationship and what Paul was speaking about is being misunderstood because we are not rightly dividing the word and applying it spiritually (to Christ and the church, as Paul said)… but I guess it really doesn’t matter if Ray teaches that we are “still in the flesh” when it comes to the topic of husbands and wives and "male and female" and that is how everyone else here sees it as well.

I shouldn't have even said anything. I was just caught off-guard at the thought that we are not "born again" until after we physically die. As I said that was NEW to me, as I did not (before) understand that to be Ray's position. I still believe that is wrong (based on the undersatnding that has been given to me), but I'll just go back to keeping my mouth shut now before I get myself in trouble here or I am accused of trying to cause division. That was not my intention. 

Thanks,
athisfeet :-X
Logged

Layla

  • Guest
Re: Ray's Teachings - Women in the Church?
« Reply #26 on: November 19, 2006, 11:51:33 PM »

Hi Arcturus

I will respond to this post of yours, but after that you may have the last word because what I see here is troubling to me.  You say you do not wish to debate, but the fact  is this response of yours as was the other speaks the exact opposite.  You have not stated, so I can only assume, that you are of the belief that woman should not teach in church.  May I ask you what your belief of church is?  Is it not the gathering of the saints?  Then I must ask you, being a woman, how do you view your over 200 posts made here?  Is it that you prefer to believe that in your posts you are not teaching or is it that you prefer to believe that the gathering of the saints here is not "church" or do you just belief the law but disregard it?

Quote
The problem of whether a woman should or should not teach or hold a position that reflects anything other than being a silent submissive member is looked upon differently amongst the many different denominations.

Irrelevant. This opening comment camouflages the content of the following teaching by obscuring the fact that the scripture does not lie. Gods word is not made less or more true based on or subject to popularity vote or different interpretations or the many different denominations.

On what basis do you see his comments camouflaging the content by obscuring the fact that scripture does not lie?  His comments are based upon the very fact that the scriptures are truth and that the scriptures (by law) provide for two or three witnesses.  You are setting up a straw man (for what purpose I do not know) by suggesting that his comments declare that God's word is made true subject to a popularity vote, because he has not suggested such a thing, but rather is stating a fact that should be acknowledged so that all of what man says is disregarded in favor of the scriptures.

Quote
(Like wearing a hat) Within the scriptures we have several women used of God to further His Will on earth.

Incorrect. Here the author mixes up the WILL of God with the PLAN of God.Case in point : Esther. God did not have to use Esther, or the burning bush or a talking donkey to further His WILL on earth. Esther, the burning bush and the donkey were all part of Gods PLAN. God doesn’t use humans, bushes or donkeys to get to His Will. He causes circumstances, He authors circumstances to create His Plan and then humans bushes and donkeys live out that plan. In a e-mail response by Ray FREE WILL he responds, quote “ distinguish between God’s “will”….and God’s “plan” to achieve His “Will”. God’s Will…live righteously….His plan….first live Unrighteously….to be humbled in our utter inability to do God’s perfect will…..repent of our wickedness. Understand….we sin from our hearts, so it is only right and good that we should be punished….. and…. converted into the Image of God’s Son.”

This sounds like nitpicking to me....hence my observation that you are looking to debate.  While I have read Ray's work and I agree with what Ray states, the fact is that God's Plan is not outside of His Will.

Quote
In the OT had Queen Esther not pleaded with the King to reverse his decision

NO….no….no….had Queen Esther not been CAUSED BY GOD to plead with the King….and thereafter had God not CAUSED the King to reverse his decision….is more like it. That the plan of God was written for a woman is secondary to the fact that God wrote and caused His Plan to include both men and women that God wrote from start to finish.
based on the testimony of an evil man, the entire Jewish nation under his command would have put to death. Here Doug puts Queen Esther on the pedestal and not God….because the difference between Gods will and Gods plan is not discerned. This error is what happens when man tries to idolise men or women above God. This error happens when human understanding over looks Gods Sovereignty. This error manifests when human heroes and heroines are given supremacy above Gods Sovereign place
Again you are setting up a straw man by suggesting that his comments are stating that "human heroes and heroines are given supremacy above Gods Sovereign place."  Esther was being divinely guided that is "understood".
   

This writing was given at a board where there are no babes drinking milk Arturus and thus simple statements like the above are not going to be trampled and twisted upon like you have done, whether you are aware of it or not.  I have learned something though, that it is best to leave the more learned comments I am given with the more learned and not share them with those who would wrestle and twist them to their own demise.

Quote
Obviously in this instance the voice of a woman was far better than the words of a man…

.....Since when is the voice of a woman far better than the words of a man?….Is it..…since the man did not represent God’s Will for His chosen people. Where? Where does scripture say this? Show me one place! Give me the second witness to this man made heresy.

Again, another twist and another straw man.  The comment does not say that the voice of a woman is far better than the words of man.  What is stated is "in this instance."

Quote
who did not represent God’s Will for His chosen people. Who is to say that a woman today should not speak for the Will of God

what heresy is this? Which woman can speak for the Will of God? Oh yes, I know. Jezebel and the Harlot, Mystery Babylon!…when a man speaks and teaches against God’s Will? When a man speaks and teaches against God’s Will then he is still in God’s plan. Pharaoh resisted God’s will. That was God’s plan.


You have split this sentence into half and then proceeded to trample it.  I have to tell you that I know that I have offered something worthwhile and hopefully some here have taken the time to "chew the cud" as opposed to receiving it as would swine who trample their food prior to eating it.  Frankly, I think I've had enough of reading your response.  I don't know if you know how offensive your response to me is.  I have prayed and it is only by the grace of God that you have not caused me to sin.  I think you ought to consider your words more carefully when responding to someone Arturus.

Peace,
Layla
Logged

Layla

  • Guest
Re: Ray's Teachings - Women in the Church?
« Reply #27 on: November 20, 2006, 12:00:59 AM »

Hi athisfeet - I do not think you are trying to cause division.  I understand it as you do, but I would like to make it clear that I do not believe that we have or anyone has yet come into the fullness of Christ (joint heirs) and this is what I believe Joe was referring to.

Peace,
Layla
Logged

Kat

  • Guest
Re: Ray's Teachings - Women in the Church?
« Reply #28 on: November 20, 2006, 11:21:54 AM »

Hi athisfeet,

I wanted to answer you because I feel that we can come to agreement on this.
I will give the scripture that shown me what I have come to believe.

Quote
Only Christ is IMMORTAL and INCORRUPTIBLE, so when we are clothed (by/with Christ) doesn't this mortal "put on" immortality and this corruption "put on" incorruption? Isn't that how we are "raised" to LIFE? Baptized into Christ's DEATH and resurrected into his LIFE?

1Co 15:51  Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
1Co 15:52  in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed.
1Co 15:53  For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality.
1Co 15:54  When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written: "Death is swallowed up in victory."

This scripture is about Christ's return, we become imperishable and immortal when we are changed and are raised up from sleep.  I believe this sleep is referring to death as Jesus referred to about Lazarus.

Joh 11:11  He said these things; and after that He said to them, Our friend Lazarus sleeps. But I go so that I may awaken him out of sleep.
Joh 11:12  Then His disciples said, Lord, if he sleeps, he will get well.
Joh 11:13  But Jesus spoke of his death, but they thought that He had spoken of taking rest in sleep.

I hope you can understand why I believe this now.
If you would like to discuss other points, that would be good,
but only if you so desire.

mercy, peace, and love
Kat


Logged

hillsbororiver

  • Guest
Re: Ray's Teachings - Women in the Church?
« Reply #29 on: November 20, 2006, 11:59:26 AM »

Hello Layla,

What you said is true.

Hello Kat,

Very good post, I don't need to add a thing.

His Peace and Wisdom to you,

Joe

PS For clarification the quote I was referring to in regard to Layla is in bold below;

I would like to make it clear that I do not believe that we have or anyone has yet come into the fullness of Christ (joint heirs) and this is what I believe Joe was referring to.

Peace,
Layla
« Last Edit: November 20, 2006, 05:21:07 PM by hillsbororiver »
Logged

Deborah-Leigh

  • Guest
Re: Ray's Teachings - Women in the Church?
« Reply #30 on: November 20, 2006, 02:22:05 PM »

Hello Layla

What an encouraging, edification!….. Now I see the light!……

…. as you say “only by the grace of God that you have not caused me to sin. “ By implication you say I am the tempter and  your cause to sin!  Give me a break. I take no responsibility for your sins. I did not cause them and will not stand in the way of them.

Your post to me is sinful…..it  is my first boarder line hate mail. Only boarder line mind you because as you say, by the grace of God you were prevented.


You say that I said I do not wish to debate. Where? Where did I say that?…Come let us reason together.

The cud you hope others have chewed is not worth chewing on because it is not food. It is heresy the content of which is a very pure form and very high grade. Enough to addict anyone and carry them off into seemingly wise sounding instruction which is in fact only a man made fiction. Rightly did Paul write…”in latter times some will turn away from the faith, giving attention to deluding and seducing spirits and doctrines that demons teach.” 1 Tim 4 : 1

You did not get the message the first time or the second time. Hope this third  time you will get it.

You haven’t a clue that the scripture does not licence, authorise or ordain women as mans authority or to teach men. Give me one scripture that says woman can teach, lead and instruct men. You can’t,   because there isn’t one.

Does this mean that Deborah was not asked by Barak to go with him or he would not go  into battle and subsequent victory? No. Does this not mean that a woman threw a rock out of a window and onto the head of a man and he was shamed to death. No it doesn’t. Does this mean that it was a sin to nail a mans head to the ground and kill him by driving a tent peg through his temples? No it doesn’t.

All you are basing your opinions and grievances  on is  birthed out of your addiction to man made heresy. The post  you brought into the Forum dressed up in sheep’s clothing written by Doug, is a crock. It violates the scripture in multiple ways. You call it food to chew as cud. I call it poison to spit out that deserves the tent peg, the crushing rock and certainly  not  to be lead into victory. Who is your King Layla?…Doug or Christ?

Layla, can you see the difference between what is RELATIVE and what is ABSOLUTE. Look at the scriptures  on Deborah a prophetess and Barak.  The entire Catholic Church is likewise deceived into putting Mary the Mother of God onto Gods throne and reducing Christ into the same picture as the infant. Christ…the all mighty Son of the One and only true and living God!   Barak made his obedience conditional upon Deborah going with him. By alignment with the woman he lost the victory that was at first said would be given into his own hands by God. Judges 4  By making his obedience to the command of the Lord that Deborah was sent to remind him of, by making his obedience lean on Deborah as provisional and dependent upon her presence, this showed God a real back hand. Was not God enough? Was a woman to be the means by which Barak was to receive his confidence? Barak  as much said it was! If you come I will go. If you won’t then I will disobey God and ignore your message reminder of Gods command to me.
The result, God took the victory that He had set aside for Barak ( FOR OUR ADMONITION!) and gave it into the hands of the woman.

 Brothers and Sons of God be warned…. That is what happens when a man will not lead. This is what happens when a man will lead only provisionally, conditionally and subsequently only upon  the woman presence of a woman. This is the  MESSAGE….the ORACLE….don’t follow me. Check the data. Do your homework. Do your research. This is not happy hour!

Ref  LOF  Adam and Eve. ….The woman you gave me to be with…..and Adam ate the apple! …..And God said…because you listened to your Wife…..

The message here….Men you are the head. The Sovereignty of Christ is your crown not your wife, girlfriend, sister or daughter. Stand alone men. Don’t compromise.  The message is clear. Love your wives yes but be the head, and receive your crowns….The King of glory is your Sovereign God. This is not a distinction given to women directly but through you men indirectly. You as men are the head of the woman. As God the Father is to Christ the Son, as Christ the Son is to man and His Church and  as man is to be to his wife. Anything less is a two headed beast. This is not God’s call or Will.  If you men disobey you will loose your reward. The lentil soup on offer here smells good. Don’t trust it. It will steal your victory and by default a woman could lead you into defeat again through seduction, via half truths and false teaching. 

What I bring here is not a teaching it is a Message it is a warning. It is not a drive for a following. Let those who have ears hear and if you do hear and if you do see you need not follow me. You will know from whom I am sent and you will hear His call to each of you male and female to follow His voice alone.
I seek no following. I look for no agreements. I only say what I see.

Women hear this you who are called to be sisters and Daughters of God and true to the faith. Here is the message. A defeated man is a hollow victory for a true woman.  A compromised man is a disgrace to womanhood. A deceived man is an anathema to the crown of God.

My brothers continue in  your call to your faith as  the Sons of God.  The roaring lion that is seeking to devour and his wolves  are the brigand teachings that come in to  scatter the true sheep and to take hostage the little ones. Our Shepherd is Christ and His Spirit is true. Not one will be snatched away…NO not one!….We are written into the palms of His hands and we obey and bow to the word of God. Praise be to His SON our King of Glory who’s Spirit is the leadership through His appointed Sons and messengers.

How awesome the power of God and of truth. Just a few scriptures to make the bandits high tail out of here! What cowards are they that bridle and saddle some of our members to bring in toxic waste as a Terrorist who would seduce a passenger to take a radio on board an air craft that will blow up in mid flight.
I for one will not fly with such a passenger who is seduced into a love affair with a terrorist. As much as I care for the passenger destined to the same inheritance with Christ, I will not pretend that the cargo carried by such, is not lethal. It is lethal. Drop the radio and come away Layla. The radio you wish to keep on board this flight to Christ is not broadcasting the correct teachings. Throw it out and stay on board.

It was for Adam to choose to follow his wife into death. We women must not lead our men into another error. If we see a man not taking up his place in the body of Christ we should not be willing to take his lost prize by  default. This is our real test of faith and love. It is a test that does not call us out to teach or preach. It is a test that fell to Abigail who sought to protect her husband from his foolishness by giving her submission to her King. Her action  saved her husband from the King David’s plan to crush him for his arrogance. I am not saying that some men are not arrogant and that some men are not fools. Some men, some theologians and some preachers clearly fit into either one or all, and some of these categories.

My message to women is do not try to usurp the man. Pray to the King. If you see a man or a doctrine of man, or your husband or brother or boy friend or fiancé teaching and preaching and believing in error and going down hill into his folly and foolishness, do not do as Jezebel, do as Abigail. Pray to our King and follow and submit accordingly. May our brothers and Sons of God pray for our victory in this our test of faith that is upon all women, sisters and Daughters of God.

And to those men or women who perhaps feel preached at or edified by a woman…God forgive me for speaking out …calling it as see it … unlike those women who were afraid to speak  and were over ruled by Christ who sent Mary Magdalene because they were too afraid…

I am not afraid. I believe God has appointed a time and place for men. It is not the place appointed to women. Our place is to pass the test of faith in Christ, encourage our men through that faith and to submit to God in His Wisdom.

Men pray for us mere women as we falter and stumble in our pathetic attempts to equal you and cat fight one another for your position of Divine authority. Forgive us. Encourage us in our submission and do not lead us into equality!

My sisters….we are Daughters of God only as we give leave and yield to His Divine order. Our knees too are going to bend.

To this message I have been given leave and the privilege to so speak!

Layla, if after this you still do not get the message….then as per your first line of your post to me quote:

I will respond to this post of yours, but after that you may have the last word…..

If this be the last word….then  rather Mercy, Grace and unmerited favour be to you the last word…

Arcturus.



Logged

Deborah-Leigh

  • Guest
Re: Ray's Teachings - Women in the Church?
« Reply #31 on: November 20, 2006, 02:45:01 PM »

His beacon of light through this storm...

Thank you Kat

Arcturus :)
Logged

Layla

  • Guest
Re: Ray's Teachings - Women in the Church?
« Reply #32 on: November 21, 2006, 12:35:34 AM »

Quote
But so to not get too far off topic, since the topic is women and teaching... how might this (being in the flesh vs in the spirit) relate to what Paul said about husbands and wives (not simply men and women):

Paul very clearly said that he was talking about Christ and the church (not husbands and wives after the flesh), didn't he?

Eph 5:32-33  This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.

Paul was not addressing men and women after the flesh; if he was, then who is the single woman or the widowed woman "subject" to?

Paul was using the marriage relationship that was established by God in the beginning to show us THE SPIRITUAL TRUTH BEHIND IT. Adam (male) was formed FIRST, THEN Eve (female - from Adam) and then they were JOINED TOGETHER and made ONE FLESH.

CHRIST FIRST, THEN the CHURCH; the HEAD FIRST, THEN the BODY.

Those who are still "in the flesh", minding the things of the flesh may have only been able to hear what Paul was saying in terms of the FLESH (applying it to husbands and wives after the flesh), but aren't we supposed to be able to discern what the SPIRIT of the Word is? Christ said that HIS WORDS are SPIRIT AND TRUTH.

IF the SPIRIT of God dwells IN US and we are born "of the spirit"... then are we still "in the flesh"? (Paul says no.) Are we still "male and female" or are we ONE FLESH?

Is God a RESPECTOR OF PERSONS? Or is man?

Are we (even though male and female after the flesh) not joined together as ONE FLESH; ONE BODY with ONE HEAD through the SPIRIT?

So are we now to look at these verses after the flesh (husbands and wives)? rather than after the spirit (Christ and the church)? To say that we are "still in the flesh"?

I pray (God willing) I am NOT still in the flesh to mind the things of the flesh.

If the spirit of God dwells IN ME, then it is not "me" (whether I be male or female after the flesh) who speaks but it is the WORD OF GOD that is IN ME that speaks; it is the SON doing THE WILL OF THE FATHER who is SPEAKING (AND DOING).

Even MEN are the BRIDE (female) of Christ and WOMEN are still SONS (male) of God.


Thank you athisfeet for bringing forth what I was unable to.

Peace,
Layla
Logged

hillsbororiver

  • Guest
Re: Ray's Teachings - Women in the Church?
« Reply #33 on: November 21, 2006, 02:48:14 PM »

To be perfectly honest I really do not know why this particular subject has become so critical, I mean how many women here plan on leading their own congregation? This seems to me to be one of those issues that really affects very few while fostering contention in the Body of Christ. Using the Forum as an example, do the women here feel they are being ignored? That their observations or questions are treated as second rate? Dear Sisters are you being demeaned or made to feel unimportant?

I would think that the God who created us knows us better than we know ourselves, does He make proclaimations just for sport? Can't anyone understand a couple of reasons just why He might have given us direction that our carnal minds, even our spiritual minds do not fully comprehend, is that where faith comes in? Are (the Body of Christ) we all really the same in every way, He makes no distinctions, really? 1 Corinthians 12 has a different take, here are a few verses;

      1 Cor 12 (Amplified)

    12For just as the body is a unity and yet has many parts, and all the parts, though many, form [only] one body, so it is with Christ (the Messiah, the Anointed One).

    13For by means of the personal agency of] one [Holy] Spirit we were all, whether Jews or Greeks, slaves or free, baptized [and by baptism united together] into one body, and all made to drink of one [Holy] Spirit.

    14For the body does not consist of one limb or organ but of many.

    15If the foot should say, Because I am not the hand, I do not belong to the body, would it be therefore not [a part] of the body?

    16If the ear should say, Because I am not the eye, I do not belong to the body, would it be therefore not [a part] of the body?

    17If the whole body were an eye, where [would be the sense of] hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where [would be the sense of] smell?

    18But as it is, God has placed and arranged the limbs and organs in the body, each [particular one] of them, just as He wished and saw fit and with the best adaptation.

(read the whole Chapter)




It is a constant battle between our carnal nature and our spiritual nature, overcoming traditions or even politically correct doctrines that seem right but we must do interpretational somersaults to make them fit what is plainly written in scripture. So we are now all mature in spirit? 

If we use this train of thought to its conclusion are men and woman who consider themselves "full in spirit" no longer in need of observing gender? Should there be contention about who is to lead the family? How does that work if the husband is not a believer? Does this mean same sex marriage is now approved by the Lord?  Are we to believe that we are now in a realm which puts us on a par with our head (Christ)? Are we to believe that since there is neither male nor female (at this very time), that we are at this very moment in a spiritual realm which needs no hierarchy?

So now that we are "no longer in the flesh" we are able to dismiss scriptural admonishment?

  1 Corinthians 14 (Amplified Bible)


  34The women should keep quiet in the churches, for they are not authorized to speak, but should take a secondary and subordinate place, just as the Law also says

  35But if there is anything they want to learn, they should ask their own husbands at home, for it is disgraceful for a woman to talk in church [for her to usurp and exercise authority over men in the church].

  36What! Did the word of the Lord originate with you [Corinthians], or has it reached only you?

  37If anyone thinks and claims that he is a prophet [filled with and governed by the Holy Spirit of God and inspired to interpret the divine will and purpose in preaching or teaching] or has any other spiritual endowment, let him understand (recognize and acknowledge) that what I am writing to you is a command of the Lord.

  38But if anyone disregards or does not recognize that it is a command of the Lord], he is disregarded and not recognized [he is one whom God knows not].




There is an ongoing effort within many denominations to justify their rejection of Paul's statement that the things he writes are the commandments of the Lord, claims are made that since Christ is "the fullness of the Godhead bodily," and since we are "in Christ," that we, too, are "the fullness of the Spirit " and now we can go beyond scripture and into "the deeper things" of the spirit.' The "deeper things of the spirit" of course means that Paul's Words about women are now nothing but anachronisms which were only valid at the time of the early church.

It is this type of supposition that leads to denying that Paul's words are "the commandments of the Lord." Is it any different than saying we are in no need of Paul's admonision that "The words that I speak unto you are spirit." How does this jibe with "my words will never pass away." This train of thought denies that Christ is His Word and Is, Was, And Will Be true. This is the exact (manmade) logic that led to the ordination of a woman to be the head of the Episcopal church at the National Cathedral. Are we to follow Babylon's lead in matters such as this? Does anyone here really believe that we are in the fullness of His Spirit, we are complete Spiritual beings, incorruptable? Anyone who can make the claim that the following has culminated in any one of us please put your response to this verse and how you fulfill it.

  Ephesians 4 (Amplified Bible)

    13[That it might develop] until we all attain oneness in the faith and in the comprehension of the [full and accurate] knowledge of the Son of God, that [we might arrive] at really mature manhood (the completeness of personality which is nothing less than the standard height of Christ's own perfection), the measure of the stature of the fullness of the Christ and the completeness found in Him.

    14So then, we may no longer be children, tossed [like ships] to and fro between chance gusts of teaching and wavering with every changing wind of doctrine, [the prey of] the cunning and cleverness of [c]unscrupulous men, [gamblers engaged] in every shifting form of trickery in inventing errors to mislead.


  The order was established very early and it is stated that this is how it should be until we return to dust, it will change at the resurrection, when we are incorruptable.


   Genesis 3 (Amplified Bible)


   (Was there a lesson in the Garden when Eve did not consult Adam in regard to eating the fruit, was there a lesson in Adam going along with Eve because his love for her was very strong, she satisfied his desires?)

    16To the woman He said, I will greatly multiply your grief and your suffering in pregnancy and the pangs of childbearing; with spasms of distress you will bring forth children. Yet your desire and craving will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.

    17And to Adam He said, Because you have listened and given heed to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, saying, You shall not eat of it, the ground is under a curse because of you; in sorrow and toil shall you eat [of the fruits] of it all the days of your life.

    18Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth for you, and you shall eat the plants of the field.

    19In the sweat of your face shall you eat bread until you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you shall return.

   Isaiah 3 (Amplified Bible)
  
   12As for My people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O My people, your leaders cause you to err, and they confuse (destroy and swallow up) the course of your paths.

I could go on and on here but those who are convinced otherwise will not readily change their minds anyway no matter how long this goes on, it was not long ago when I too believed this to be just applicable to the early church. The reason I wrote this was not to change anyone (only He can) but to give some scriptural references to those who have yet to form an opinion who have been observing this thread without comment and would like some scriptures to search.

It is always a good principle not to attempt to void a clear and direct scripture with a more mystical or obscure one, it is better to try to unlock the more mystifying with the clear and direct Word.

His Peace and Wisdom to you,

Joe 


P.S. This will be my last post on this thread
   


Logged

brothertoall

  • Guest
Re: Ray's Teachings - Women in the Church?
« Reply #34 on: November 21, 2006, 03:41:03 PM »

Very good Joe!

bobby
« Last Edit: November 21, 2006, 05:35:14 PM by brothertoall »
Logged

hart4god

  • Guest
Re: Ray's Teachings - Women in the Church?
« Reply #35 on: November 21, 2006, 08:42:17 PM »

Hi,

Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. (1Co 14:34 KJV)

I always wondered what law Paul was talking about here.

-anyone know?


judie h.
Logged

Craig

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4282
  • There are two kinds of cops.The quick and the dead
Re: Ray's Teachings - Women in the Church?
« Reply #36 on: November 22, 2006, 10:00:01 AM »

This horse has been beat enough. 

Warning, read the forum rules before posting.  This thread has crossed the boundry.

Craig
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.083 seconds with 26 queries.