Featured Women deacons

Correct....but, the opposition refuses to address the context: Instead they will insist on debating the term "use the office of"...who cares?

They will not reasonably address your argument about what the Scriptures clearly teach are the list of qualifications...instead they will merely call you a dinosaur who despises "equality" or some other non-quantifiable term...

You hate "equality" Bron...that's the argument :sleep:

 

It's the Hillary response. What does it matter? Of course it matters. If you could present the Greek word for "office" in the the text, you would. But you cannot, because it isn't there. I believe ANY & EVERY addition to the Word of God is an error. I am surprised at the willingness to dismiss changes to the text just because it conforms to modern tradition. I doubt you would so nonchalantly disregard additions to the Word by Catholicism or Mormonism.

If we believe in a word for word translation of the Bible, then let's not vary from that interpretational method just because it appeals to our own theology.

 

Without the added text, the "office" is nonexistent. It is a state of being, not a formal position within a hierarchical religion. That is the liberal world's methodology. God's way is always best. Even when it contradicts our human reasoning. I'll stick with the real text, you can keep your translator-added doctrine.

Where did the "equality" comment come from? It has nothing to do with equality, it's about fidelity to the text of Scripture.

 

I know, it's a crying shame that I hate equality so much, HOS. But the real truth is equal status, different functions, just like the Godhead. It has worked in our family for almost 29 years and I don't see any reason to change, especially not when it includes compromise for the sake of political correctness. Romans 12: 1-2 and Psalms 1: 1-2 are still in the bible. Honoring God's word and order of things has brought blessings to this family and brought us thru the fiery trials.

 

God called a Gentile to write part of the New Testament.

You are reaching the silly stage now.

"Culture" has become the canned excuse for those who want to question Scripture. The simple truth is that deacons are to be the husband of one wife. Now I realize that the left is pushing homosexual lifestyle and marriage as an acceptable lifestyle but that acceptance does not apply to the word of God.

That is simply false!

Now I don't see mutual submission in the above passage. If you thoughtfully read the chapter you will see that Verse 21 refers to the previous 20 verses and is not talking about mutual submission of husband an wife.

 

You have shown nothing from Scripture that contradicts the requirements for a deacon from 1 Timothy 3:12 and you cannot! There are no Scriptural passages that contradict 1 Timothy 3:12. You may be able to present various interpretations of some other passage of Scripture in an attempt to prove your argument but 1 Timothy 3:12 says what it says!

 

No, Thomas, no offense, but it has been shown that the qualifications for deacon have to be for a man only. Period. You can rebel, you can protest, but you have not a leg to stand on biblically.