The Story Infinite

aymon de albatrus

INTRODUCTION

No matter from which side the modern church is looked at, it is about invisible, without influence, weak and stunned.

This is the result of at least two situations that have entered the church and put deep roots in her bosom:

Pietism and the World

Pietism retires the church in a spiritual only state, away from the sinful and evil world to the Christian "fortress".  The end result is that the "Salt and Light" are taken away from the world and cease to proclaim the Kingdom of God for they are now in the Christian citadel under a bushel, exactly contrary to what our Lord has commanded.  We could say: " Ichabod".

The world's effect is more penetrating and perhaps more destructive.  It may seem a paradox that the pietistic churches (most, these days) are those with little defense against the world's lures. Almost wanting it, the Pietists have slowly brought the ways of the world in the church's womb and have assimilated its most flattering manifestations, such as: democracy, equality of sexes, egalitarianism, even illuminism, and, believe it or not the theory of Evolution.  

These choices have revealed themselves lethal and deadly for both the purity of the church as to her very existence. These days if someone sticks exactly to what is written on the Bible he is immediately branded as "fundamentalist", intended as a defecated word, intended as categorizing one out of reality, out of the world. Well out of the world, yes.  These brethren must have forgotten that all we know about God  has come out of the Bible and the same applies to what God wants from us, created creatures out of nothing and kept in life by God Himself.  There is no other personal revelation of God outside the Bible, so why are we seeking truth in the world???

Today we read something in the Bible and say: "Yes, OK!  But these things were for other days, now we are more modern and know more, beside we more emancipated."  Really?  What are we actually saying?  We are effectively affirming that we are not believing in the Bible, or at least, the Word of God has to be interpreted according to our times, tunes, culture and, ABOVE ALL, to us.  But if we put in doubt a part of the Bible, what have we actually done?  We have in effect reduced the Bible to a nullity, because, for us, there is nothing of absolute in the Verb having lost the point of divine reference in replaced it with our shifting references.  Bu what saith mighty God: For I am the LORD, I change not; ...... (Malachi 3:6 AV)

Now, having become like the world, in facts and deeds, obviously we have nothing to say to it, we are, as plainly seen in all places, useless and of naught influence.

One of the major contemporary problems of the church is the feministic "revolution", a true child of the world that of divine has nothing (actually it is truly satanic) that has corrupted their mind and has even dragged the majority of men into it putting the church upside down (seems a veritable Eden II,  see Adjunct D).  Even the existence of Adam and Eve as real human beings is put to the ridicule, but if we do not believe that the first 3 chapters of Genesis speak of real persons, we might as well throw the Bible away for in that case it is useless.

Well let us see a little of what that implies concerning the relationship between man and woman.

INDEX

INTRODUCTION

THE FOUNDATION

THE ROLE OF MAN

THE ROLE OF WOMAN

HOW DOES JESUS BEHAVES TOWARDS HIS HEAD - GOD !!

Didactic arguments not supported by the Word but deduced from It. 

ADJUNCT A:     Prophetesses and other females 

ADJUNCT B:     Are women permitted to be deacons?

ADJUNCT C:     Are women permitted to teach or preach?

ADJUNCT D:     Eve Is Again Listening to the Voice of the Serpent

ADJUNCT E:     What doe the Greek 5399 says!!!

ADJUNCT F:     The case of Galatians 3:28

ADJUNCT G:     Egalitarian Priesthood!!!

ADJUNCT H:     Dress Symbolism

ADJUNCT I:     The Head Covering — A Biblical Perspective

ADJUNCT J:     What About Women Wearing Pants?

 

 

THE FOUNDATION

BELIEVE YE THAT THE BIBLE IN ITS COMPLETENESS IS INERRANT?
if not, READ NO MORE, FOR IT WOULD BE USELESS TO YOU.

BELIEVE YE THAT IT IS THE BIBLES THAT INTERPRETS THE WORLD, THE SOCIETY AND TIMES, AND NOT VICE VERSA?

THEN READ WHAT THE WORD OF GOD SAYS ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MAN AND WOMAN.

THE ROLE OF THE MAN

THE ROLE OF THE WOMAN

HOW DOES JESUS BEHAVES TOWARDS HIS HEAD - GOD !!

But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. (1 Corinthians 11:3 AV)

Having seen Jesus' behaviour, our supreme example, towards His Head (God, His Father) how should the man behave towards his Head (Jesus, the Son) and how should the woman behave towards her head (the man, the image and glory of God)? 

Didactic arguments not supported by the Word but deduced from It. 

ADJUNCT A:     Prophetesses and other females 

MIRIAM:

Miriam was the sister of Moses and Aaron. The memorable thing that we hear about her is that she sang, with the women, a song to the Lord, Exodus 15:20-21.  What Mirian sang is presented as a great personal thing, but, in fact it is not so.  The facts are that in Exodus 15, it was Moses, with the men, that sang a thanking song to the Lord, 19 verses, 1-19 whilst Miriam, and the women, sang only one verse, they simply repeated the first verse of the 19 of Moses. 

Miriam, the prophetess usurped the authority (Eve comes to mind here) of both God and that of Moses, in Numbers 12:2.  In the first place because she took the gift of prophecy as her personal one and not as only the mouthpiece of God and in the second because she railed unjust accusation to Moses (her head for it is not said she was married) that was, moreover, the chosen of the Lord.  Aaron, pathetic figure, was not the instigator of this rebellion but Miriam.  This can be easily proven by noting three things: in verse 12:12 it is Mirian that attacked Moses, secondly it is Mirian that receives the corporal punishment ( leprosy ) and it is only after Moses intercedes for her that God grants grace by commutating the heavy punishment into a banishment of only seven days away from the camp, the same punishment as if her father had spat on her face Num 12:14 (fatherly authority of Moses confirmed), and in the third place it is the character of Aaron, easily lead by others, see golden calf.  From that time on, the deeds of Mirian are not heard of, anymore.

DEBORAH

Of Deborah, it has been said that the meaning of the reference to the palm and to her husband is not understood.  This is so if one starts from a forced interpretation that gets lost, but if one starts from the established order of God, there is no difficulty.  First of all it must be accepted that God has given clear and fixed regulations on how mankind should behave and also He has well defined the relations and functions of the man and of the woman, as those between Man to Christ and Christ to God, 1Co 11:3.  Now, the fact that He has imposed these regulations onto mankind does not mean that He is subjected to these laws for He is sovereign on all in all and he is outside of the laws he gave to His creation, Deu 29:29.  Alas, in this democratic mentality we live in, it is almost inconceivable that Gad can act outside the laws He has imposed upon mankind, nor how He can possibly infringing them.  This is one of the reasons why "Christianity" is so week these evil days.

That God can do as He wants and nobody can stay His hand is demonstrated by the fact that He has brought the Saviour into this world not thorough His first fruit of creation, that is the man (who is His image and glory) but through the weaker vessel, the woman (the glory of man) to obviously demonstrate is ABSOLUTE Sovereignty over all things.

God has given the government of the world to the man and not to the woman, but this does not mean that He cannot lift up whom He wants (and this without changing the laws He gave to mankind).  He can anoint a she donkey to prophesy, without homologating her to sit and to bray in the midst of the congregation.  Jesus Himself said that the stones would "cry out" for Him.  People, let us not limit God in our minds.  Incidentally, when compiling a list of female prophetesses, this female donkey is usually left out.

Then, what is the meaning of the palm and of the husband?  The palm denotes the place where Deborah passed on the oracles of God, that is, notwithstanding she was a prophetess and a judge, but like for all the other women, it was not permitted her to sit in the midst of the elders, nor at the gates, nor in the temple, nor she had governing authority, for she was a woman.  This gets confirmed by the mentioning of her husband, meaning,  that notwithstanding her calling to be a mouthpiece of God, she had nonetheless to submit in everything else to the authority of her husband as established by the irrevocable Law of God, 1Co 11:3   We see a paralleled situation between Jesus, Mary and Joseph, Jesus was the anointed of God, and was not the son of Joseph, but Jesus was subjected to His vicarious father, Joseph, as the Law commands.  The case of Deborah is another situation where God demonstrates is Absolute Sovereignty on all things.

Regarding Barak (as all the Baraks of today) he may have been a warrior but he was missing internal fortitude, he was mentally castrated, just like the men of our days, and it is for this reason he was dependent on a woman, characteristically as today.  The woman Deborah said to him : ... Has not Jehovah the God of Israel commanded? Go and draw toward Mount Tabor, ....., God had actually told this to him directly, but Barak did not trust God and had need for a woman to confirm this command, he needed her to "hold" his hand.  And for this the final humiliation was given him by another woman for it was Jael to kill the hated enemy Sisera and in a despicable way, totally contrary to the ethics of true warriors.   To note that in ancient times the guests were Highly respected, but with deceit and a vile act Jael killed Sisera in his sleep.  No greater offence could be given to Barak, the great warrior.  (Incidentally do note that Jael's husband is also mentioned, for the above reasons).

In defence of this pathetic figure of  a man, we need to note that Barak does appear in the list of heroes of the Faith in Hebrews 11, whilst Deborah is not.  Perhaps he had redeemed himself in the end.

It is obvious that in those days (as today) men had a pusillanimous nature and it is for this that God raised a woman to put them to shame.

It is said (underline by some women, obviously) that Deborah decided to go with Barak without apparently asking her husband's permission, but this is only a conjecture. It is clear that that was a desperate situation and was part and extension of the occupation that God had in sovereignty and exceptionally called her.  Whether or not she had asked her husband's permission it is not known, but  in this desperate situation her not doing so does not in any way abrogate the submission of woman to the man (as some women intend), otherwise 1Co 11:3 is false.  Besides, even  if she did not ask for permission, it does not follow she was free to do so, she simply acted on her own in disobedience to the law.

ULDAH

Huldah, stayed at home. She was the wife of Shallum (maybe widowed at that time, there is no clear evidence) who was the uncle of Jeremiah. Jeremiah 32:7

Huldah is mentioned only twice and for the same reason in 2Ki 22:14 and 2Ch 34:22 in the context that King Josiah, only 26 years old, was distraught by the content of the book of the Law, lost but just found during the works of renovation in the Temple.

Apparently the reason as to why the delegation did not look for Zephaniah was that at time he was too young and had not started prophesying as yet, nor they sought Jeremiah because he was in Anathoth, a fair distance away, but the agitated sentiments of the king incited the deputation to find immediately anyone that could prophesy so to give immediate response to the king, for he said generically with anxiety " Go, inquire of Jehovah for me, .... 2 Kings 22:13, and for this reason the "college" is mentioned for it was a living quarter very near the royal palace, where Huldah lived. 

The Four Virgin daughters of Philip (probably kept virgin be their father 1Co 7:37,38)

Of the four virgin daughters of Philip, only this can be said: first of all they lived in their father's home, and of what they purportedly said, nothing is reported.  Whilst of what Agabus (the prophet) said, all is reported in details, Act 21:11.  If anything can be construed it is only on Agabus. 

To note that Paul remained many days at Philip's place to await for Agabus, but in all this time, nothing is recorded of what these girls said (if anything was said) nor Paul seems to have taken act of it.

Hanna

Hanna was a widow of 84 years old that lived in the Temple and she got in the scene probably because hearing the commotion of the situation, Luk 2:38.  She repeated in part Simeon's words, a man full of the Holy Ghost that the Spirit brought to the Temple to see Jesus, as it was promised him, Luk 2:27.

The she donkey of Balaam

Let no one think of himself as "something" for the Lord can even use a donkey to prophesy, Num 22:28 and also, as Jesus said: And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out. (Luke 19:40)

Women at the Tomb

Some present "much ado" of the first recorded announcement, of the resurrection, that was given to the two women who were instructed to go and tell Jesus' disciples about it, that the Apostles did not believe, anyway.

The facts presented are that the two Marys were at the tomb, not because they believed and had more faith than the Apostles, but because their normal occupation was to anoint the dead body with spices and oils before burial.  They knew were Jesus body had been placed Mark 15:47, so they brought with them the spices and oils they had prepared two days before and debating between themselves how could they remove the stone blocking Jesus' burial place.  For this reason they were there.  Subsequently they received notice of the resurrection by the two angels that told them to bring this info to the Apostles, on the way Jesus confirmed the charge.  The Apostles did not believe them but they neither believed the report two men that Jesus met on the way to Emmaus to whom beginning from Moses, and from all the prophets, He explained to them the things about Himself in all the Scriptures  Luk 24:27.

In  these modern times there is a push to make it appear as if the charge to inform the Apostles, given to the woman by the angels and by Jesus, elevates these women to high position in the church, almost apostles.  Whilst the whole thing was simply a postal service.

Jesus chose only men as His disciples and there is no evidence that he has changed idea in the meantime.  Heb 13:8.

Interesting to note that Jesus, in a similar manner, sent others to proclaim His bidding, such as the Gardarene maniac: Howbeit Jesus suffered him not, but saith unto him, Go home to thy friends, and tell them how great things the Lord hath done for thee, and hath had compassion on thee. (Mark 5:19 AV). Does this mean that the demoniac became an Apostle?

Aquila and Priscilla

Aquila a Priscilla were husband and wife and given that they are mentioned together, and that sometimes Priscilla is mentioned before Apollo, and so not a few modernists proclaim the ascendancy of Priscilla over Apollo.

But let us see the Biblical appearances:

Aquila First:
And found a certain Jew named Aquila, born in Pontus, lately come from Italy, with his wife Priscilla; (because that Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome:) and came unto them. (Acts 18:2 AV)

And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly. (Acts 18:26 AV)

The churches of Asia salute you. Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house. (1 Corinthians 16:19 AV)

Priscilla Prima:
And Paul after this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave of the brethren, and sailed thence into Syria, and with him Priscilla and Aquila; having shorn his head in Cenchrea: for he had a vow. (Acts 18:18 AV)

Greet Priscilla and Aquila my helpers in Christ Jesus: (Romans 16:3 AV)

Salute Prisca and Aquila, and the household of Onesiphorus. (2 Timothy 4:19 AV)

The circumstances:

Aquila First: Two accounts of decision making

One account of salutation

Priscilla First: One account as voyage companion

Two accounts of salutation

From here there is no indication that Priscilla was the one that was teaching and preaching.  What can be gleaned from Act 18:24,27 is that they both heard Apollo that seemed to have some lacunae (he knew only the baptism of John Act 19:1-7) and so they took him, probably in their home, perhaps for lunch (usual Christian practice) and in a quiet private environment they talked about this lacunae.  There is nothing here to justify a presumed official teaching ministry of Priscilla.  Moreover it was only a matter of baptism and not of Theology, for Apollo was  mighty in the scriptures, Acts 18:24 AV

For those who do not belie in the baptism of the Spirit this verses should offer them some headache for wanting to make Priscilla appear as a teacher, they have to admit, since the the argument was the baptism of the spirit, to them heresy, that Priscilla was in fact teaching heresy (if she was teaching indeed) and this is the very reason why the woman cannot preach or teach.

by aymon de albatrus

ADJUNCT B:     Are women permitted to be deacons?

This is a loaded question! I know that no matter how I answer this question, there will be those who will take issue with me. However, I am not nearly as concerned about how others might judge me as I am about the manner in which I will be judged by God.

Because of the feminist movement in our culture our perception of male and female roles has been altered. The Scriptures (which we are being told are archaic) establish a role which is not politically correct.

1 Corinthians 11:3 (NASB)
" But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ."

This is not a popular view of the male female role, therefore, we are told, it is to be rejected. Therefore an emotionally charged issue has been created by those who have an agenda.

When we talk about male female roles, we must first understand that no one in the church that I know of believes that males are superior to females. The two highest I.Q. scores of all time, were obtained by women. We are not talking about equality, or tradition, or chauvinism. When we come to a subject like this we must concern ourselves with, what do the Scriptures say?

Our questioner really asks two questions, what is the woman's role in the church, and can a woman serve as a deacon? I will handle the 2nd question first. Can a woman serve as a deacon?

I believe that there are basically only two verses in all of the New Testament, both of which are indecisive, upon which a position may be formed to affirm that the New Testament talks about women as deacons.

The first one is found in Romans 16:1:

Romans 16:1(NASB)
"I commend to you our sister Phoebe, who is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea. . ."

The word translated by the NASB as "servant" comes from the Greek word diakonos. (diakonos) {dee-ak'-on-os} It is translated by the King James Version as: minister 20 times, servant 8 times, deacon 3 times. Diakonos means:

1) one who executes the commands of another, esp. of a master, a servant, attendant, minister

1a) the servant of a king

1b) a deacon, one who, by virtue of the office assigned to him by the church, cares for the poor and has charge of and distributes the money collected for their use

1c) a waiter, one who serves food and drink

So, the question here in Romans 16:1 is: was Phoebe a "deacon," in the sense that she occupied an official office in the church, or was she a "deacon" in the sense that she was one who served the church as millions of women have through the centuries without occupying an official office?

From this verse alone it is impossible to come to a conclusion. Since words must be defined by their context, and the word "diakonos" literally means a servant, attendant, or minister, it is inappropriate to force a conclusion or an interpretation on this verse. We know for certain that she was a "servant," for the church at Cenchrea. That's all we know.

Phoebe is the only female in the entire New Testament to whom the term "diakonos" is applied. Throughout the history of the translation of the Bible into English, only one version (the RSV of 1946) transliterates the term as "deaconess." The NIV, which is not a "translation" in the truest sense of the word places "deaconess" in the marginal notes.

Remember that translations do no determine the meaning of words in the New Testament. The only thing you can say for certain about the way different translations translate words is that they reflect the understanding of the translating groups. To properly understand a Bible word, and its' definition, one must consult the Bible!

Therefore, based upon Romans 16:1 alone, there is no reason to believe that the New Testament church had an official "office" know as deaconesses. There simply is not enough evidence to come to such a conclusion.

The second one is found in 1 Timothy 3:11:

The only other passage in the New Testament that could possibly be used to support woman as deaconess is found in 1Ti 3:11.

1 Timothy 3:11 (NASB)
"Women must likewise be dignified, not malicious gossips, but temperate, faithful in all things."

This verse is found in the qualification list of elders and deacons. It is asserted by some that this is then the qualification list for deaconesses. The word translated "women" in this verse is also commonly translated "wives." This passage then could easily be referring to the qualifications of the elders and deacons wives.

Since there is not a single definitive passage in all of the New Testament, which talks about "deaconesses" as an official office in the New Testament church, one might ask: is there any evidence that such an office existed in the New Testament church to be found in sources outside the Bible?

The answer is NO. For over 300 years there is a total lack of evidence for the office of deaconesses. After 300 A.D. as the church slipped deeper and deeper into apostasy with regard to church organisation and structure, we do find the office of deaconess. We also find the official office of "bishop" being applied to one elder, who had rule over several congregations, which is in direct violation of the New Testament teaching with regard to congregational autonomy. Nothing after the 3rd century would help us to understand how the New Testament Christians understand church organisation and structure.

Therefore, no one can say for certain that the office of deaconesses existed in New Testament times, and anyone who asserts that a woman may serve as a "deacon" today does so without Biblical authority.

By Mike Scott Minister

Further study on the Subject

Phebe is referred once as a servant and there is not sufficient evidence to doubt that her service was primarily serving the female members of her church.  She would certainly have opened her home to itinerant believers, as Paul says of himself, but to give her a status of government in the church is to read in it more that what it says.  To make much of her presumably taking the letter is not proving anything but practicality,  for in those perilous times an ol