Cheryl

Don,
Ryan figured out how to add the go back or forth in the posts at the end of the comments too. Thanks for the suggestion and thanks to Ryan for his good work!

Oops, it disappeared after he put 10 comments per page. Oh well. I think the comment pages works well now.

Don,

I figured out how to create PDF documents and I put it on this post and will do so on each post after this.  I don’t know when I will get to posting them on each article in the past but sometime when I have a life back again or when I want to just take a break from editing.  As far as the forward and back button, I’ll give that to my son to see if he can figure it out.

tiro,

Very good points!

Lin,
Here is the link http://www.cbmw.org/Journal/Vol-13-No-1/Women-in-Ministry-Practical-Application-of-Biblical-Teaching

Lin,
The events after Adam and Eve ate the fruit show a couple of things:

1. Eve realizes that she had been deceived. Her eyes were opened to her state of deception and who deceived her.

2. Adam’s blaming of the woman (the fact that he was offered the fruit by a deceived woman is no excuse for Adam to eat. Eve did not deceive Adam) and God (blaming God for giving him the woman) shows that Adam was acting in rebellion against God and he took no responsibility for his sin.
   God knew their hearts and knowing their hearts allowed God to give an act of mercy to Eve. God treated Adam differently by kicking Adam out of the garden. God determined that it was the man who had a heart that would rebel against God and eat from the now forbidden tree of life if he were left in the garden.

Also God did not ask Adam what Eve had done and this proves that each person was held responsible for their own sin and that the man was in rebellion while the woman was deceived and she did not act out of a desire to be in rebellion. There is no other reason given in scripture for why it was only Adam who brought sin into the world and hierarchists who want to read an authority over all of humanity given to Adam have no scripture that states this “fact”. They have to read it into the text. I believe it is time that we start reading scripture for what it says and that we should also pay attention to what scripture doesn’t say instead of relying on the presupposition that church tradition has taught us.

I use the NASB

Don,

You are very helpful! I have changed the post to make sure that no one would misunderstand the English to think that Paul was talking about “males”.

I also think it is a great idea to also put my posts as pdf files. I will work on that addition as I have time. Excellent ideas for improvement for sure!

Lin,
Amen!  You have hit the nail on the head.

Don,
I have the book on order and I will verify what you have shown.

One other thing…when I questioned why CARM was allowing “christdependent” to attack posters and did nothing about her attacks on egalitarians, I also questioned why the name “christdependent” when she was not apparently depending on Christ or on grace.  My comment was not a question of her salvation but rather a comment about her “depending on Christ” to give grace to others.  When one attacks and calls other people names are they showing that they are dependent on Christ in their actions?  Jesus’ example is that of grace towards brethren in Christ and those who regularly refuse to give grace to others may be dependent but they are not being Christ dependent since Jesus says that we are to have grace with each other and to love one another.

.

It is amazing at how people can twist one’s words.  It is not uncommon to say “If you are a Christian you will forgive others”.  This is not an accusation that one isn’t a Christian.  It is an assumption of obligation to do certain things because one is a Christian.

Lin,
You make some very valid points!

The fact is that one cannot find all of the “rules” against women in the bible. This is why CBMW has created a huge list of what women can and cannot do and some grey areas that even CBMW doesn’t know the answer to yet. Churches have to come to CBMW to check to see if they can use women in certain ministries because they can’t find the answers in scripture. And what used to be okay in the past is now not allowed. CBMW used to allow women to be Hebrew teachers in a seminary but now that is forbidden by scripture. Also teaching church history is now forbidden to but where did scripture change in the last few years that these two things are now forbidden when they used to be fine?

It is absolutely true that we have created a Christian Talmud in this hierarchy movement. In my opinion we have out-phariseed the Pharisees themselves!

Exegetist,

What you said was the truth and not a lie. In over two years of history on this blog only once did a name come up (“christdependent”) from CARM’s discussion board and it was only regarding why there was a double standard and while egalitarians were being disciplined on the CARM, yet there was abusive language being allowed to happen against egalitarians by one of CARM’s posters and Diane was responsible for doing nothing about it even though it had been reported many times.

When one creates a set of rules and then allows some to bypass the rules while others are treated with the letter of the law, the question will come up why the double standard. Why allow the name calling and mocking when it is by one of their own complementarians? This is not an “attack” on a person posting on CARM but a valid example of an two tier system that treats people differently depending on their view of women in ministry. If Diane had disciplined “christdependent” for her name calling and mockery, she would never have been mentioned on my blog. No one here called “christdependent” evil or wicked or a witch or going to hell. Can this also be said about some of the posters at CARM? Diane herself has done much name calling and allowing these abusive words to be said about egalitarians merely because of a difference in belief in a secondary doctrinal issue is a shame from those who call themselves followers of Christ!

When the leader in charge watches a person throwing stones at another person and then that leader complains that the stone thrower is “attacked” because the one who has been hit by the stone complains about the abuse (when nothing has been done by the leader to stop the abuse), this is the same tactic practiced by high control abusive groups. Someone not involved in such a group can identify the tactic for what it is. It is blaming the victim for the abuse and using the fact that one “dares” to speak out against the abuse as a reason for hurling more abuse.

What happens with hierarchists is that they need to grab onto anything, and I mean ANYTHING to support their harsh treatment of women. Matt says that I attacked him first on the radio so this justifies his attack on me. I have asked people who know neither Matt nor myself to listen to the audio files and tell me where the “attack” is. People have told me there are amazed and ashamed at how Matt treated me. Do they recognize an “attack” against Matt from me? No one has seen it or pointed it out to me. The fact is that Matt holds women back from teaching the bible with authority and he isn’t going to allow me to be looked on with favor no matter how kind I come across. I must be made to look like an enemy of the church so that he can create a reason to call me names, speak of me in a disrespectful tone and mock me. Then if anyone comes to my defense, they are seen as “attacking” Matt. So in Matt’s eyes the only way that I would not be “attacking” him is for me to say that I am wrong in believing that a woman is allowed by scripture to teach the bible with authority to men. Anything else is “attacking” him.

Also the only way for someone who regularly enjoys reading my posts to not be attacking Matt is to say that Matt is a man’s man who should be allowed to jump on women for teaching the bible with authority to men. If they disagree with Matt’s treatment of me, they should suck it up and not speak up regarding this injustice because Matt is just too sensitive to take any criticism for his behavior. What is wrong with this picture? Matt loves to be called a heretic by Oneness Pentecostals and he doesn’t feel “attacked” at all, but let someone say he is wrong to call me a heretic and the world has suddenly fallen in. This is certainly a double standard and it is not wrong to point this out. The bible is filled with instances of injustice being pointed out. When an unrighteous act is identified the result should be repentance, not an escalation of the same “attack”.

The fact is that strict hierarchalists must make enemies of egalitarians. Those who take hierarchy to the extent that CARM does can not say good things about egalitarians no matter what. While I found good things to say about Matt’s ministry and I commended him for his ministry on the first radio program, he has yet to say that my ministry is valid or worthwhile or that I am teaching good things to Jehovah’s Witnesses and helping them find faith in Christ. Why is that? It is because anyone who doesn’t agree with him on this secondary issue is an all-out enemy. It appears that it is almost impossible for him to find something good to say about me even though we agree on all of the essentials of the Christian faith.

I have been told that I was extremely nice to Matt on his radio program even when I was constantly cut off and derided. Yet Matt makes fun of my gentle manner that does not attack back. What Matt would like me to do is to say anything that he could rework and create into an “attack” that would justify his own bad behavior. If I tell people that I don’t want hateful speech on this blog, then I am wrong for saying I will edit out bad words. If I don’t edit people when they share their disappointment and dismay at bad behavior, I am told that I am an evil person.

All of this is the fruit of hierarchy. There is great fear in their losing control.

Jennifer,
Provocative points!  Apparently some are willing to try to correct people if they have no talk-back at all, except of course for 1.5 minutes at a time.  I even had my timer out and was ready to practice with the timer.  All I needed was the questions ahead of time.  I suppose supplying the opposition with the questions ahead of time was a bit of a scary thought.   Didn’t scare me none but who would know that?  I don’t eat raw meat so I may be just a wee bit different 🙂

Thank you, Greg.  Yes, strength and commitment are very important and some of the most unlikely people have been used by God in the past just because they didn’t give up.  That should give hope to all of us.  Numbers don’t count and personal power doesn’t count.  It is a matter of dedication to what is true.  If we stick to that and serve the Lord Jesus with all our heart, how can we fail to fulfill his calling on our lives?  When one has this attitude, how can mere words stop us?  They can’t.

Thank you, Sandy.

Don,

This one is from the bible:

“Woe to those who call good evil and evil good”. The complete quote is here from Isaiah 5:20-23 and it is sobbering to read the whole quote:

Isa 5:20 Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
Isa 5:21 Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes And clever in their own sight!
Isa 5:22 Woe to those who are heroes in drinking wine And valiant men in mixing strong drink,
Isa 5:23 Who justify the wicked for a bribe, And take away the rights of the ones who are in the right!

tiro3,

As far as the “he man” quotes from Matt and others on his radio show, I just roll my eyes. My husband is a real “he man” and he isn’t like this stereotype at all. He has emotions and he is a real strong man who has learned to understand what gentleness is. He also never makes childish five-year-old jokes to prove his manhood. There are a lot of men who are real men who love women who are strong and can defend themselves biblically. I rather think it should be said that real men and women are strong and mature in the faith and their strength has nothing to do with muscles, good looks, eating a raw steak or making grunting sounds.

tiro3,

Here is how you put the code in for “quote marks”

Go into the html at the top of the comment box (top right) and you will need to add

at the beginning of your paragraph or quote and at the end add

This pulls up a separate box where you can add in this html code. When you are done, click on the update button on the bottom right.  That should do it!

Don,

I updated my post.  Your wisdom was certainly worth listening too!

Don,

You make a good point.  Those who have integrity and who love truth will not be convinced by smear tactics.  We are to test all things and to hold fast to what is good.

Tiro3,

I agree that this is trash talk. It is something that I would expect to come from the mouth of an unbeliever. I have seen so many respectful egalitarian Christians do so much better, even many who have shown up on CARM (Matt Slick’s discussion board) and who have been Christian enough to dialog respectfully even with those who have called them many other bad names. This is shameful and I wonder who Matt Slick is accountable to? Surely he has some mature Christians in his group of friends who could counsel him on a proper attitude. I have no doubt that if he is a true Christian that he could learn.

Sometimes people don’t learn until they are brought to account publicly. It can be a painful lesson, but it usually is a lesson that won’t need to be relearned. If Matt’s friends really love and respect him, they should be the ones to call him to account because I do not think that he will listen to anyone else.

Psalmist,

Thank you! I have a strong desire for truth and this kind of disrespectful talk needs to be accounted for by those who think it okay to treat other Christians this way. When will it stop? I don’t know however when the Christian world is given the ability to see what is underneath the surface perhaps they will call him to account. Can you imagine what an unbeliever would do who was treated like this? Who would blame them for thinking bad thoughts about Christians?

A Christian apologist must be accountable for his attitude. God wants us to defend the faith but he also cares about our attitude when we do the defense. The Bible speaks about the attitude of those who should be teaching us:

2 Timothy 2:24 The Lord’s bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged,

2 Timothy 2:25 with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth,

Don,

Good points and I will submit to your suggestions and rewrite the article to include these.

Okay here are some questions to ponder:

1. There are two classes of apostles, the foundational apostles and all others who are sent but not specifically sent to represent Christ and his resurrection. If Paul is in the second class, not a foundational apostle why did he have so much authority to determine doctrine when no other apostle (other than the twelve) had such authority?

2. Why did Paul say that he was an apostle of Jesus Christ appointed to be a witness to the resurrection when no one else made that claim (except the twelve)?

3. Are there actually three classes of apostles? The foundational apostles who did extraordinary miracles, and were overseers of the church and created church doctrine as representatives of Christ; then secondary apostles who represented the church and were sent out to evangelize and start churches; and… Paul?

4. What class of apostle is Matthias? Is he an apostle of the church or an apostle of Jesus Christ? Who appointed him? The church is allowed to appoint apostles as representative of the church, but which scripture says that the church or the twelve may appoint one of Jesus’ representatives when all the others were appointed only by Jesus? Shouldn’t there be a scripture that gave them the authority to appoint Jesus’ representative? If there was, where is it?

5. Is it possible that God allowed the disciples to pick a replacement for Judas and this made Matthias an apostle but God fit him into the second category (an apostle of the church) not the first category (an apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ)? Is it impossible for Jesus to have placed Paul as his choice of witness to the resurrection when he was given so many revelations?

6. What difference would this all make? If Paul is a secondary apostle of the church, would he have authority to set doctrine? If we say that secondary apostles can set doctrine, then why wouldn’t we think that doctrine can still be set by secondary apostles?

7. Did Paul think that he was special and equal in authority and in his commission by Jesus as were all of the other apostles of Jesus Christ?

Good comments, Don. I completely agree that there were other apostles other than the ones whose mission it was to be witnesses to the resurrection of Jesus.

Did Paul exercise the same authority as Peter and the other apostles?

Did Paul get his authority from Jesus as the 11 disciples did who were picked personally by Jesus?

John 6:70 Jesus answered them, “Did I Myself not choose you, the twelve…”

Were the 12 apostles chosen personally by Jesus?

Did Paul ever state that he was chosen personally by Jesus and his mission was to be a witness to gospel of the resurrection?

Did Paul have this authority?

Don,

While I gave my last word about why I believe as I do, there might be some words left in me to try to stretch people to think outside the box.

The issue of binding and loosening has nothing to do with a choice for a replacement for Judas. Also Paul is not contrasting himself with the key (super) apostles but saying that he is equal to them (he says he did not fall short of them). Paul’s claims certainly have to be dealt with by any who see him as one who has less authority than the ones called to be witnesses of the resurrection and to be foundations of the church. Is Paul indeed unique or is he also chosen by Jesus personally as all the others are for the same mission? If we get held back by thoughts that the disciples couldn’t have gone beyond their delegated authority we may miss out on an opportunity to see a lesson in all of this. I would just like to encourage people to think. What are the entire facts of the case and don’t stop with a thought that may be uncomfortable regarding apostolic authority. Jesus told them to wait until they were filled with the Spirit for power. After that date they didn’t seem to make any mistakes in unison.

Also no issue that has application for our lives today (this issue has applications for women’s ordination) is unworthy of spending time reasoning through. When all the evidence is on the table and none of the evidence is ignored, everyone can make a decision for themselves. Paul’s claims that no one else ever made need to be thought through.

Thanks for all your gracious words of wisdom.

Truthseeker,
I should go back and label all of the responses under a tag for challenges so that they can be brought up on one page.  I will put that on my list to do.

Thanks also for providing this research.  It is good information for us that ready needs someone of your caliber can provide!

Suzanne,

Thanks for telling me that you missed the anti spam word and copied from the other page.  I couldn’t figure out how all the extra code got onto the page.  I cleaned it up and then removed it.  I was thinking gremlins were living here 🙂