Will there ever be women ministers in the ICC??
nancy
On Jul 29, 1996 14:22:12 in article <Re: Will there ever be women ministers
in the ICC??>, 'sco...@nhr.com (Scott W. Schreiber)' wrote:
>>Also, why can't they be given the title of minister, or evangelist? They
do
>>the same job as the men, but they don't get the title.
>
>The scripture says women aren't supposed to have authority over men.
But is this a cultural thing, or is this God's will? Remember, back then a
woman was property of her husband and didn't have any rights. In fact, it's
still that way in many middle Eastern countries.
>To this I say that the pastor at my church considers himself a
>servant, and doesn't suppose to have "authority" over anyone.
What about the leaders in the ICC? Does the wife, as womens leader have
authority over male disciples in her zone?
If Kip is away, then is Elena in charge???
nancy
nancy
There has been a lot of debating lately on other Christian ng's about women
ministers, and I would like to know why the ICC does not allow women to
preach in church. There are scriptures about women being silent in church,
etc, but I have heard women give talks in ICC churches before, so that
argument doesn't work.
the same job as the men, but they don't get the title.
Jeetendra Manghani
In article <4tj1f9$6...@news1.t1.usa.pipeline.com> n1...@usa.pipeline.com(nancy) writes:
>On Jul 29, 1996 14:22:12 in article <Re: Will there ever be women ministers
>in the ICC??>, 'sco...@nhr.com (Scott W. Schreiber)' wrote:
>
>
>do
>>>the same job as the men, but they don't get the title.
>>
>
>But is this a cultural thing, or is this God's will? Remember, back then a
>woman was property of her husband and didn't have any rights. In fact, it's
>still that way in many middle Eastern countries.
Current Middle Eastern Countries DO NOT reflect Roman way of life
2000 years ago. I've already posted about women being inferior
to men in all cultures prior to 1920. It is not true. Again,
thousands of women held leadership roles in pagan religions in the
Roman days.....ever heard of high priestesses? It was very common
for men to be afraid of women in authority, religiously or
politcally. It was NOT a cultural thing when Paul wrote about the
position of women in the church. It was a biblical thing based on
the happenings in the Garden of Eden. i.e. It was God's will.
I wish people would check their history books before posting blanket
statements like this. I understand that you didn't know what I just
wrote about, but at the same time, you never confirmed your
hypothesis of the role of women in the days of Rome, and that can be
misleading when trying to prove an arguement. I've wrote the same
thing to a couple other posters in a couple other posts. ;-)
>
>>To this I say that the pastor at my church considers himself a
>>servant, and doesn't suppose to have "authority" over anyone.
>
>What about the leaders in the ICC? Does the wife, as womens leader have
>authority over male disciples in her zone?
>If Kip is away, then is Elena in charge???
>
My understanding is :
1) Usually Elena, as the better half of Kip ;), usually accompanies
her husband in trips.
2) One of the other evangelists are "in charge" of the church while
Kip is away.
Jeetendra Manghani
member of San Diego Church of Christ
Scott W. Schreiber
n1...@usa.pipeline.com(nancy) wrote:
>Also, why can't they be given the title of minister, or evangelist? They do
>the same job as the men, but they don't get the title.
The scripture says women aren't supposed to have authority over men.
Roger/Michelle Poehlmann
nancy (n1...@usa.pipeline.com) wrote:
: There has been a lot of debating lately on other Christian ng's about women
: ministers, and I would like to know why the ICC does not allow women to
: preach in church. There are scriptures about women being silent in church,
: etc, but I have heard women give talks in ICC churches before, so that
: argument doesn't work.
: the same job as the men, but they don't get the title.
My wife has the benefit of hearing both men and women preach, since in
the ICC the groups frequently split up men/women (Titus 2:1-5) for
classes and seminars. It is very true that the women's ministry leaders
work extremely hard, as you said, "they do the same job as men". Many
of the critics on this newsgroup disagree, however, and would begrudge them
equal pay, or even *any* pay for the hard work and long hours they put into
the ministry.
Roger Poehlmann
member, SF Church of Christ
(International Church of Christ)
nancy
On Jul 29, 1996 22:49:06 in article <Re: Will there ever be women ministers
in the ICC??>, 'jman...@sdcc15.ucsd.edu (Jeetendra Manghani)' wrote:
>In article <4tj1f9$6...@news1.t1.usa.pipeline.com>
n1...@usa.pipeline.com(nancy)
>writes:
>>On Jul 29, 1996 14:22:12 in article <Re: Will there ever be women
ministers
>>in the ICC??>, 'sco...@nhr.com (Scott W. Schreiber)' wrote:
>>
>>
They
>>do
>>>>the same job as the men, but they don't get the title.
>>>
>>
a
>>woman was property of her husband and didn't have any rights. In fact,
it's
>>still that way in many middle Eastern countries.
>
>Current Middle Eastern Countries DO NOT reflect Roman way of life
>2000 years ago. I've already posted about women being inferior
>to men in all cultures prior to 1920. It is not true. Again,
>thousands of women held leadership roles in pagan religions in the
>Roman days.....ever heard of high priestesses? It was very common
>for men to be afraid of women in authority, religiously or
>politcally. It was NOT a cultural thing when Paul wrote about the
>position of women in the church. It was a biblical thing based on
>the happenings in the Garden of Eden. i.e. It was God's will.
>
>I wish people would check their history books before posting blanket
>statements like this. I understand that you didn't know what I just
>wrote about, but at the same time, you never confirmed your
>hypothesis of the role of women in the days of Rome, and that can be
>misleading when trying to prove an arguement. I've wrote the same
>thing to a couple other posters in a couple other posts. ;-)
husband was from Mexico, and he had veiws like that about women, she used
to tell me about it and how hard it was for her.
And what about some middle eastern countries that still require women to
wear veils, and long dresses etc? I see people like that all the time even
down the street from where I live. And what about Hasidic Jews? The women
wear long dresses, and the marriages are arranged. None of them have any
authority.
As for what happened in the Garden of Eden, so that is your argument for
women not being in positions of authority?? If that's the case, then why do
many ICC women work? Some in management positions where they have authority
over men? Aren't they going against the bible by doing this???
>>>To this I say that the pastor at my church considers himself a
>>>servant, and doesn't suppose to have "authority" over anyone.
>>
>>authority over male disciples in her zone?
>>If Kip is away, then is Elena in charge???
>>
>
>My understanding is :
>
>1) Usually Elena, as the better half of Kip ;), usually accompanies
>her husband in trips
>Kip is away.
still wouldn't be in charge??
What if Kip died? Would she be acting head of the church until a new leader
was selected?
>
>Jeetendra Manghani
>member of San Diego Church of Christ
Jeetendra Manghani
What I wrote in my post is that women being the inferior 'race' or
sex, more accurately in the *ROMAN* Empire is often misunderstood.
Many people nowadays look back at American history or French
history, etc, and apply the principles they see to all cultures
previous because going forwards, cultures advance, and there is no
possible way that some cultures 2000 years ago could be less
advanced than now. That is not true. When Paul wrote about the
role of women being submissive, it was against the culture of the
day, as it is today!
>As for what happened in the Garden of Eden, so that is your argument for
>women not being in positions of authority?? If that's the case, then why do
>many ICC women work? Some in management positions where they have authority
>over men? Aren't they going against the bible by doing this???
>
As far as I understand, Paul writes that it was Eve who led Adam
into sin, and therefore women are not allowed to hold spiritual
authority over men. (Anyone can correct me if I am wrong) Women in
management positions do not have spiritual authority over men.
I believe that many people in the ICC *HAVE* taken this doctrinal
point and abused it. Example: Women can't baptize. I didn't like
this 'doctrine' when it was in effect, but that is what changed
later. I let women lead birthday parties and going awaay parties,
and I'm sure some ICC men would be surprised by this! When they
bring it up to me then I just talk to them later about why I asked
them to. I am not writing this post to 'show women their place',
but to help provide some creedibility to Paul's writings.
>>
>>My understanding is :
>>
>>1) Usually Elena, as the better half of Kip ;), usually accompanies
>>her husband in trips
>
>>2) One of the other evangelists are "in charge" of the church while
>>Kip is away.
>
>So if Elena did not go, even though she is the wife of God's Leader, she
>still wouldn't be in charge??
>
>What if Kip died? Would she be acting head of the church until a new leader
>was selected?
No, she wouldn't. Somebody like Marty Fuqua or Bruce Williams would
take over.
Scott W. Schreiber
jman...@sdcc15.ucsd.edu (Jeetendra Manghani) wrote:
>I wish people would check their history books before posting blanket
>statements like this.
I wish smarty smart college students would check their attitudes at
the door.
If women in bilical culture were so cool and powerfull, why were they
not allowed to attend stonings, or other public events?
Check that history book.
Starr
n1...@usa.pipeline.com(nancy) wrote:
>There has been a lot of debating lately on other Christian ng's about women
>ministers, and I would like to know why the ICC does not allow women to
>preach in church. There are scriptures about women being silent in church,
>etc, but I have heard women give talks in ICC churches before, so that
>argument doesn't work.
>Also, why can't they be given the title of minister, or evangelist? They do
>the same job as the men, but they don't get the title.
>
Nancy, since the ICC got it's start from the mainline Churches of
Christ, and since they have *very* opinionated views of women
preaching in church - and back it up with select Bible verses - I
sincerely doubt it will ever happen.
The ICC has gone way further with women's ministry than the mainline
CofC has *ever* done and probably will *ever* do. I remember the
first time I saw women serving communion at an ICC service - passing
the plates, not praying over it - I was *shocked*. Not because there
was something wrong with this, mind you, but because in the mainline
CofC where I basically grew up, this would *never* happen. Just as
there are no women songleaders in the CofC (that I know of anyway).
Women can teach other women, in women's studies (in the CofC), and
participate in mixed Bible studies, but most of them are silent when
they do. I really give the ICC credit for breaking some of the CofC
traditions which I thought were just a *bit* outdated. If you want a
good laugh, go to some of the "Restoration" web sites and read
Campbell's treatise on a good Christian woman.
nancy
On Jul 30, 1996 17:14:51 in article <Re: Will there ever be women ministers
in the ICC??>, 'jman...@sdcc15.ucsd.edu (Jeetendra Manghani)' wrote:
>>>I wish people would check their history books before posting blanket
>>>wrote about, but at the same time, you never confirmed your
>>>hypothesis of the role of women in the days of Rome, and that can be
>>>misleading when trying to prove an arguement. I've wrote the same
>>>thing to a couple other posters in a couple other posts. ;-)
>>husband was from Mexico, and he had veiws like that about women, she used
>>to tell me about it and how hard it was for her.
>>And what about some middle eastern countries that still require women to
>>wear veils, and long dresses etc? I see people like that all the time
even
>>down the street from where I live. And what about Hasidic Jews? The women
>>wear long dresses, and the marriages are arranged. None of them have any
>>authority.
To which Jeetendra replied:
>What I wrote in my post is that women being the inferior 'race' or
>sex, more accurately in the *ROMAN* Empire is often misunderstood.
>Many people nowadays look back at American history or French
>history, etc, and apply the principles they see to all cultures
>previous because going forwards, cultures advance, and there is no
>possible way that some cultures 2000 years ago could be less
>advanced than now. That is not true. When Paul wrote about the
>role of women being submissive, it was against the culture of the
>day, as it is today!
Hmmm, what about the stories in the bible about men having all those wives,
concubines, Abraham sleeping with Sarah's maid to conceive a son, Dinah's
rape, the adulteress brought to Jesus(how come the man wasn't brought to
him too?) and even Joseph planning to divorce Mary, but quietly so she
wouldn't be killed?
It seems as if there are a lot of biblical women who's lives, marriages,
sex lives etc were controlled by men.
<snip>
) Women in management positions do not have spiritual authority over men.
In some instances they do, your boss can tell you not to bring your bible
to work, you have to work on Sundays, not to discuss religion on the job,
make you do things that go against God, etc.
<snip>
:
>>So if Elena did not go, even though she is the wife of God's Leader, she
>>still wouldn't be in charge??
>>
>>What if Kip died? Would she be acting head of the church until a new
leader
>>was selected?
>
>No, she wouldn't. Somebody like Marty Fuqua or Bruce Williams would
>take over.
>
>
>Jeetendra Manghani
>member of San Diego Church of Christ
So...what would happen to her then??? Would she still be on salary? Would
she still be the head women's counselor or whatever her title is???
nancy
Jeetendra Manghani
In article <4tm4ml$8...@madrid.visi.net> sco...@nhr.com (Scott W. Schreiber) writes:
>jman...@sdcc15.ucsd.edu (Jeetendra Manghani) wrote:
>
>>I wish people would check their history books before posting blanket
>>statements like this.
>
>the door.
>
>If women in bilical culture were so cool and powerfull, why were they
>not allowed to attend stonings, or other public events?
>
>Check that history book.
>
>
Please check my statements again.....
Women in ROMAN culture were "cool and powerfull". Timothy was
leading the church in Ephesus, where ROMAN pagan religion prevailed,
and where the Christians were predominantly "ex-pagan" as opposed to
"ex-Jewish".
I don't know much about Jewish women's role and stature during that
time, but Paul's intended audience were the gentile disciples, who
probably had little notion about the stature of women in Judaism.
I am sorry if I came across as arrogant and "smarty smart". It was
not my intention to have that sort of an attitude.
Jeetendra Manghani
member of San Diego Church of Christ
PS. I have one class left to take, so I won't be a smarty smart
college student anymore, just a smarty smart single professional.
\:-)
ATredway1
Women in the ICC usually minister to women on small groups, one to one, or
regarding strictly women issues. However, when the Church is being spoken
to in general women usually don't preach in order to comply with the
bible. Now they can speak about their lives and things, but teaching the
Church as a whole isn't seen. I'm not sure exactly about how one attains
certain titles, but the man and woman who lead our sector are both called
evangelists, but of course his wife doesn't preach at Church services.
Now his wife has never been called a minister to my knowledge, but a
women's minister only.
COneill182
In my readings last night, I came across a very interesting passage
in the book "Jesus Didn't Go To Church", written by Charlton Smith -
copyright 1994 - Doubleday. I'm going to post some of it here, since I
think it speaks directly to some of the issues we're discussing here, and
in the "Women in the ICC" thread:
"A narrowly lilteral modern-day approach to Paul's very specific
advice to the early Christian communities is in opposition to the spirit
of virtually all of his more general statements. His own treatment of
women, as described in his letters and the Book of Acts, is always in
keeping with his statement in chapter 3 of his letter to the Galatians
that "there is not male and female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus."
Paul approved many specific practices that some modern Christians
refuse to accept, ironically often citing Paul as their authority. For
example, those who attribute to Paul the idea that women have no place in
the pulpit must deal with chapter 16 of his letter to the Roman's "I
commend you to Phoebe our sister, who is also a minister of the church at
Cenchreae, that you may recieve her in the Lord in a manner worthy of the
holy ones,and help her in whatever she may need from you, for she has been
a benefactor to many and to me as well."
The word "minister" is a translation of the Greek word _diakonos_ that
can also be translated "deacon" or "administrator", but which
traditionally, as for example in the KJ Bible, appears as "servant",
thereby obscuring the sense of religious leadership in Paul's description
of Phoebe. The context in which the word appears in Paul's letter
strongly suggests, however, that the literal meaning of the Greek word
_diakonos_ is correct and that editors of traditional Bibles have simply
been uncomfortable with a biblical account of a woman church leader.
Paul also pays tribute, in chapter 16 of Romans, to Priscilla as one
of "my co-workers in Christ Jesus". Paul says Priscilla and her husband
Aquila, "risked their necks for my life." In chapter 18 of the Book of
Acts, Priscilla, a tentmaker by trade (like Paul himself) who worked with
Paul, is portrayed, in a church setting, instructing a man named Apollos
about Jesus. In both instances Priscilla is mentioned before her husband.
In chapter 4 of his letter to the Phillipians, Paul speaks of Euodia
and Syntyche, two women who "struggled at my side in promoting the gospel,
along with Clement and my other co-workers". In his his letter to
Philemon, Paul includes in his greeting Apphia, one of three leaders of an
early church, and in chapter 4 of his letter to the Collossians, Paul
gives greetings to "Nympha and the church in her house." Thus there are
at least six very specific biblical accounts of Paul's enthusiastic
support for women in church leadership roles, including one who is
specifically described as a minister and another as giving religious
instruction to a man. Almost half of the thirty-three people Paul names
in chapter 16 of his letter to the Romans are women.""
...In chapter 16 of his letter to the Romans, Paul also pays tribute
to Junia, "a, fellow prisoner" who was "prominent among the apostles" (a
strong indication of religious leadership) and "in Christ before me".
All of the early translations of the NT from original Greek into
English, including the KJV (1611), use the name Junia, but editors of many
modern Bibles have chosen to use the male form Junias. The transformation
of Junia into Junias, appears to be based on the opinion of the editors
that it would not have been possible for a woman to have been prominent
among the apostles of early Christianity ( even though there is a detailed
account of a woman "disciple", Tabitha, in chapter 9 of Acts)....
- Just thought this quote might provide for some interesting discussions
on this NG -
Catherine O'Neill
DAnder9518
In article <32010C...@ecu.campus.mci.net>, Forrest
<for...@ecu.campus.mci.net> writes:
>Isn't it interesting men have no problem with women serving any meal -
> EXCEPT the Lord's Supper?
Score 10 points for Forrest -- that's classic!
I've always enjoyed serving the Lord's Supper where I go to church,
regretting that women aren't allowed to do the same. Of course, it's
nothing worth switching to the ICC over. . .
----->Dave
Starr
ar...@nntp.best.com (Catherine Hampton) wrote:
<el snippola>
>I didn't realize you'd grown up with the CofC, Starr. :>
<snipped that too>
Well, since I was about 11 years old anyway. Was baptized, (by
immersion, if you care), active in my church youth group, went on
youth missions to fantastic places like nowhere, Texas, (it's on the
map if you look hard enough :) to help with their vacation bible
school, went to Church Camp every summer, actually was supposed to go
to Lubbock Christian College before I did the ultimate rebellion &
joined the Army. I had a friend when I moved to Tucson who was in the
CofC. She and I got to know each other, one day she invited me to
church with her. We were basic Easter & Christmas Lutherans, so I
went. Enjoyed it, & stayed. My parents thought there were worse
activities I could do with my teenage years and so went along with it.
Of course, when I joined the ICC in Denver (87), at first they were
okay, then when they saw extreme personality changes in me (telling
them they were "lost" and just hadn't seen the light, and if they just
would open their Bible, God would make it clear to them) they wanted
me committed. :) Another story for another time. But yes, I grew up
CofC. As mainline, traditional as you can get.
Martin Hinves
n1...@usa.pipeline.com(nancy) wrote:
>On Jul 29, 1996 14:22:12 in article <Re: Will there ever be women ministers
>in the ICC??>, 'sco...@nhr.com (Scott W. Schreiber)' wrote:
>
>
>>>Also, why can't they be given the title of minister, or evangelist? They
>do
>>>the same job as the men, but they don't get the title.
>>
>>The scripture says women aren't supposed to have authority over men.
>
>But is this a cultural thing, or is this God's will? Remember, back then a
>woman was property of her husband and didn't have any rights. In fact, it's
>still that way in many middle Eastern countries.
>
>>To this I say that the pastor at my church considers himself a
>>servant, and doesn't suppose to have "authority" over anyone.
>
>What about the leaders in the ICC? Does the wife, as womens leader have
>authority over male disciples in her zone?
>If Kip is away, then is Elena in charge???
>
>
>nancy
I did my own research on the subject of the status of women in the
ICC. When I found out a few things about why certain verses were
written in the letters that are used to keep women down in the ICC the
ICC leaders did not want to know.
I said you have taken these verses literally not understood why they
were written and what was happening at the time.
I think this is a very great danger for all christians.
You put modern day meanings and interpretations on ancient events.
You read a verse and interpret it without knowing about the times it
was written in or why it was written.
Especially if you take verses at random from all over the bible you
loose the context.
For instance take Ps 14:1 "There is no God".
There I have provved biblically GOD DOES NOT EXIST.
This type of reasoning is wrong.
To fully understand what is being said I need to pray about it and
also read the verses around this one to get the context correct, also
I may want to look at what was happening when it was written.
But that is just my veiw <G>
Martin " Oops I studied history too much" Hinves
>
Martin Hinves
jman...@sdcc15.ucsd.edu (Jeetendra Manghani) wrote:
>In article <4tj1f9$6...@news1.t1.usa.pipeline.com> n1...@usa.pipeline.com(nancy) writes:
>>On Jul 29, 1996 14:22:12 in article <Re: Will there ever be women ministers
>>in the ICC??>, 'sco...@nhr.com (Scott W. Schreiber)' wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>Also, why can't they be given the title of minister, or evangelist? They
>>do
>>>>the same job as the men, but they don't get the title.
>>>
>>>The scripture says women aren't supposed to have authority over men.
>>
>>But is this a cultural thing, or is this God's will? Remember, back then a
>>woman was property of her husband and didn't have any rights. In fact, it's
>>still that way in many middle Eastern countries.
>Current Middle Eastern Countries DO NOT reflect Roman way of life
>2000 years ago. I've already posted about women being inferior
>to men in all cultures prior to 1920. It is not true. Again,
>thousands of women held leadership roles in pagan religions in the
>Roman days.....ever heard of high priestesses? It was very common
>for men to be afraid of women in authority, religiously or
>politcally. It was NOT a cultural thing when Paul wrote about the
>position of women in the church. It was a biblical thing based on
>the happenings in the Garden of Eden. i.e. It was God's will.
>I wish people would check their history books before posting blanket
>statements like this. I understand that you didn't know what I just
>wrote about, but at the same time, you never confirmed your
>hypothesis of the role of women in the days of Rome, and that can be
>misleading when trying to prove an arguement. I've wrote the same
>thing to a couple other posters in a couple other posts. ;-)
>>
>>>To this I say that the pastor at my church considers himself a
>>>servant, and doesn't suppose to have "authority" over anyone.
>>
>>What about the leaders in the ICC? Does the wife, as womens leader have
>>authority over male disciples in her zone?
>>If Kip is away, then is Elena in charge???
>>
>My understanding is :
>1) Usually Elena, as the better half of Kip ;), usually accompanies
>her husband in trips.
>2) One of the other evangelists are "in charge" of the church while
>Kip is away.
>Jeetendra Manghani
>member of San Diego Church of Christ
At one sermon (preaching the lowly church status of women in the ICC)
it was stated that even the newest Christian male could tell Elena
what to do and she would have to do it.
Martin "
nancy
On Aug 04, 1996 09:09:45 in article <Re: Will there ever be women ministers
I know Chris G is RCC, Catherine is Orthodox, and Scott and Joanne are
Lutheran ...am I right?
And Ovum is Coc?
What about the rest of you??
Has anyone become an atheist?
Has anyone other than Kim become non Christian?
nancy
nancy
On Aug 04, 1996 11:24:07 in article <Re: Will there ever be women ministers
in the ICC??>, 'hin...@world.net (Martin Hinves)' wrote:
<snip>
>You put modern day meanings and interpretations on ancient events.
>You read a verse and interpret it without knowing about the times it
>was written in or why it was written.
>Especially if you take verses at random from all over the bible you
>loose the context.
>For instance take Ps 14:1 "There is no God".
>There I have provved biblically GOD DOES NOT EXIST.
>This type of reasoning is wrong.
>To fully understand what is being said I need to pray about it and
>also read the verses around this one to get the context correct, also
>I may want to look at what was happening when it was written.
>
>But that is just my veiw <G>
>
>Martin " Oops I studied history too much" Hinves
From my notes of Nov 9, 1995
The topic: " How to have a bible study like never before"!
Guest Speaker: Steve Cunard (?) of the New York City Church of Christ I
wrote Cunard, but my discipler said his last name was Johnson)
Number 3 part 1:
Intreprete a passage in light of it's context. Don't take things out of
context.
Part 2:
Interpret according to correct meaning of words
3: Understand the grammar
(And number 4 which is the most important)
"Interpret the passage in light of historical, cultural, background.
Transport yourself back in time. Middle East Culture!!!"
These were his words, not mine!!
nancy
>
>
>
Gintas Jazbutis
I've become a crusty old curmudgeon
(though anyone who would admit it
really isn't).
When I was booted from the San Diego
church, I went to a "tweener" C-o-C, and
eventually in Atlanta ended up at a mainline
C-o-C.
Gintas
Gintas Jazbutis
gin...@concentric.net
Chris Garland
It's funny -- I kind of cringed at being labelled a Roman Catholic. Let's
just say I attend the Roman Catholic Church.
DJRTX
On 4 August 1996, in article <4u2rjn$a...@news1.t1.usa.pipeline.com>,
n1...@usa.pipeline.com(nancy) writes:
<much snipping>
>I know Chris G is RCC, Catherine is Orthodox, and Scott and Joanne are
>Lutheran ...am I right?
>And Ovum is Coc?
Hi. Thanks for asking for a correction if needed. :-) Actually, I am not a
Lutheran. I belong to a nondenominational (Baptist leaning) church. FWIW,
my beliefs are what might be considered an eclectic combination of
Baptist, COC, Presbyterian, ICC, and *very*, very conservative charismatic
interpretations of the Bible. If anyone can figure that out, they are
doing better than I am. ;-)
<snip>
Joanne
DAnder9518
In article <4u2sts$b...@news1.t1.usa.pipeline.com>,
n1...@usa.pipeline.com(nancy) writes:
>Guest Speaker: Steve Cunard (?) of the New York City Church of Christ I
>wrote Cunard, but my discipler said his last name was Johnson)
>
>Number 3 part 1:
>Intreprete a passage in light of it's context. Don't take things out of
>context.
>Part 2:
>Interpret according to correct meaning of words
>3: Understand the grammar
>(And number 4 which is the most important)
>
>"Interpret the passage in light of historical, cultural, background.
>Transport yourself back in time. Middle East Culture!!!"
>
>These were his words, not mine!!
Ironically, last year I sent a letter to Steve Kinnard, expressing my
concerns about the teachings in the New York City Church of Christ, and
how the teachings fall short of these standards.
I never received a response. . .
---->Dave Anderson
Starr
n1...@usa.pipeline.com(nancy) wrote:
<snip>
>And now you are in a Wiccan church right?
Actually, I'm Roman Catholic <shock, gasp, horror>
I have many paganistic/wiccan leanings - I think knowledge is a
wonderful thing and I learn as much as I can. I have many friends in
the pagan/wiccan community. I have yet to find a church that I can
sincerely believe in with all my heart, but I know there is a God that
I can believe in with all my heart.
>
>I know Chris G is RCC, Catherine is Orthodox, and Scott and Joanne are
>Lutheran ...am I right?
>And Ovum is Coc?
>
nancy
On Aug 05, 1996 10:56:03 in article <Re: After leaving the ICC, where did
you go??>, 'Chris Garland <chr...@village.ios.com>' wrote:
>It's funny -- I kind of cringed at being labelled a Roman Catholic. Let's
>just say I attend the Roman Catholic Church.
>
Why?
nancy
Catherine Hampton
nancy (n1...@usa.pipeline.com) wrote:
: On Aug 05, 1996 10:56:03 in article <Re: After leaving the ICC, where
: Why?
Why did he cringe, or why does he go to a Roman Catholic Church? ;>
I'll let him answer the second. The first should be obvious, I
think -- especially after being in the ICC, who wants to be labeled?
And even in the less rigid end of the discipling movement, I assumed
that membership in a church meant agreement with and adherence to
all doctrines in that church.
I still have to watch out for that attitude -- it's easy to find
myself feeling I have to justify or answer for Orthodox Christian
doctrines/beliefs even when I'm none to sure I agree with them or
understand them. But while there is such a thing as =dogma= --
stuff you have to believe to be part of a religious community, there
is a lot more opinion than dogma in healthy groups. Perhaps this is
because they aren't mistaken for each other.
Catherine
Chris Garland
I agree wholeheartedly with Catherine. I simply don't agree with all of
the teachings of the R.C. Church. I have been spending a lot of time
studying what they believe and WHY they believe them, and there are still
a few areas that simply don't make a lot of sense to me despite the
official teachings and guidelines. I'm not condemning those beliefs -- I
just don't feel comfortable embracing them. Unfortunately, they are some
of the beliefs that fundamentally define "Catholics."
Why do I go to a Catholic Church? Because I DO believe wholeheartedly in
the Mass, and the "core" teachings of the Church.
TriciaAZ
In article <4u4k03$c...@news.ios.com>, Chris Garland
<chr...@village.ios.com> writes:
>n1...@usa.pipeline.com(nancy) wrote:
>>I know Chris G is RCC, Catherine is Orthodox, and Scott and Joanne are
>>Lutheran ...am I right?
>>And Ovum is Coc?
>
>It's funny -- I kind of cringed at being labelled a Roman Catholic. Let's
>just say I attend the Roman Catholic Church.
>
>>What about the rest of you??
>>
I attend a Baptist church.
SpeakerForTheDead
n1...@usa.pipeline.com(nancy) wrote:
<deletia>
: What about the rest of you??
: Has anyone become an atheist?
Yes.
: Has anyone other than Kim become non Christian?
See above:)
Mjaybird7
After almost having a nervous breakdown for fear I was going to burn in
the furnace of hell for leaving ICOC and that God didn't love me anymore
(like loving someone who hates you), I hooked up with a local church
outside the ICOC (heaven forbid) where I learned about grace and the true
character of God. ( and all the while, I judged everyone around me as
going to hell and knowing nothing about the real God). I was gonna go
change all those other "congregations" but it ended up God (with the help
of those who were so ignorant of God (a little humor, LOL) had something
to change about me.
I am now going to Christ Community Church (An Evangelical Free Church).
Very Christ, Faith, and Bible centered. It's a good thing for me.
P.S. (Sidenote)
Joseph Smith is NOT a prophet of God.
The Book of Mormon is NOT the Word of God either.
(Whew! that felt great!) Ex-moron (oops!) I mean Ex-Mormon also. (Okay! so
that wasn't a very tasteful joke)
EOshiro
(NOTE: After the AOL crash, I tried to post things. Some made it, some
didn't, so I hope I'm not repeating myself.)
In the book _Prepared to Answer_ by Gordon Ferguson, there is a 7 1/2 page
section about the New Testament's teaching on women's roles in the
Kingdom.
It starts off quoting 1 Timothy 2:8-15, and here is part of the commetary:
> In verse 12, the women are forbidden to *teach* a man in
>a public setting in a manner which giver here *authority*
>over him. She can do some teaching in more private settings
>(with a submissive spirit, of course), for Priscilla had a
>part in teaching the eloquent Apollos (Acts 18:24-26). The
>real issue is having authority over a man, and in my judgement,
>she has the freedom to do *many* things without assuming
>authority. A wife has the freedom to do many things without
>assuming the authority of her husband. Why should the role of
women in the church be different in principle from the
>husband/wife relationship?
A commentary of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 in part:
> Note that women were to be "in submission as the Law
>says." "The Law" here is likely a reference to the last part
>of Genesis 3:16, which reads: "Your desire will be for your
>husband, and he will rule over you." This desire for her
>her husband is is a negative in the context, perhaps a
>reference to her desire for his *position.* (Compare the
>use of the word "desire" in Genesis 4:7.) At any rate, the
>submission enjoined in 1 Corinthians 14:34 is enforced
>with a reference to the Law, the OT.
> But just what did the Law allow generally in the case
>of women? Actually, it allowed a good deal more than
>the casual observer might think. It allowed Deborah to be
>a judge and to lead in battle (Judges 4:4-10). On the latter
>point, was her leadership allowed only because no man
>was willing to lead? Probably, but she exercised this
>leadership in a team situation with Barak, and I am
>confidentit was done with a submissive demeanor! The
>Law also allowed Huldah to be a prophetess whose
>advice was sought by male leaders in 2 Kings 22:11-20.
>It allowed Anna to be a prophetess also, as seen in Luke
>2:36-38. Whatever else may be said, the Law did not rule
>out women leadership, even very *prominent* leadership.
>Therefore, it would be risky to make too broad an
>application from this passage!
In my own experience, I have seen women speaking in front of men on a
number of occasions. Testimony for the Lord's Supper, of course. Making
announcements about Women's D ay. Speaking to the women at a singles'
devotional (while the men were still in the room.) And speaking at a
workshop for the child care workers.