Featured women preachers/pastors....biblical or not?

Herbert Armstrong's Worldwide Church of God

 

Not psych meds. PANDAS cannot be treated with those. It is must be treated with immune modulation. Even the antibiotic that is most often used (Zithromax to kill strep) has been proven in a rat study to be anti-inflammatory in the brain. The problem with PANDAS is that strep antibodies, which are normal, end up in the brain, where it is an abnormal place for them to be. It is due to a leaky blood brain barrier. There are many strains of strep A, and they don't even know if some strains are more likely to cause PANDAS than others. Genetic susceptibilities have been discovered that are similar to those found in Tourette's. It's an involved subject. But the bottom line is that it is an auto-immune attack on the brain. The brain is on fire. You have to put the fire out in the brain. Psych meds can't do that (unless they happen accidentally to have anti-inflammatory properties).

Beautiful. Yes, kids who are diagnosed with ADD/ADHD often improve in a different school or environment.

Oh yes, these are physical issues. There has been a tradition of separating the psychiatric from the medical. Boston Children's Hospital has medically kidnapped children who have been diagnosed with PANDAS. They have insisted upon treating it with psych meds and have not returned children to their parents. All of these issues get very, very real for some poor families out there.

Well, I'm not saying spankings make people violent or that first person shooter games do. I'm saying that when my parents overly zealously, with no common sense, followed the child rearing teachings of the Worldwide Church of God, their first born child -- my oldest brother bore the brunt of it. It shaped who he became. He rebelled rather than withdrawing because of his personality. He became alienated from my parents from infancy onward. He gravitated toward peers who were also rebels.

I was a mother of an infant son when I learned how my oldest brother was treated as an infant. My heart cried for him, and I forgave him. I prayed to God to help me to forgive my parents.

You keep returning to the issue of personal accountability. Well my brother always said, if you can't do the time, don't do the crime. He became Christian in prison. He would not even argue your point. I would not even do it.

But would you really say it had no impact on him, how he was treated as a baby? Come on. It matters whether babies and children are neglected and abused and how they are raised. You have to know this.

And what about accountability for Herbert Armstrong? Garner Ted Armstrong? Should they have accountability for misleading people? For giving God a bad name? Just because my brother has responsibility does not take responsibility away from my mother, my father, or the Armstrongs. Garner Ted Armstrong wrote the book, The Plain Truth about Child Rearing. Look him up. Read about his scandals. You will see his character. He had affairs with college students at Ambassador College. Yet if students were caught fornicating, they were expelled and "excommunicated" and ostracized. You can read all about this and much, much more if you care to dig.

You want authority, then hold authority accountable and give them some blame where it is due.

No argument here.

Well said.

 

Thank you. I'm sure that's true. Somebody said that the Old Testament is the story of an imperfect people trying to understand a perfect God.

 

Thank you.

 

I think there is scriptural support for authoritarianism, complementarianism and egalitarianism. There are many churches and denominations and many theologies. In practice most Christian marriages are complementarian, not authoritarian. If people are living together according to their understanding of God's Word, and they give each other love and respect, I suppose there is room for many personality dynamics and many cultural differences.

In practice I think Christianity improves people morally if their hearts and minds are open to the Holy Spirit, and this cannot but help all relationships in this life, including marriage.

I think historically and cross culturally Christian cultures compare quite well to other cultures in treatment of women.

 

Yes, this is fully consistent with Jesus saying, let he would be first serve he who is least. It's a model of leadership involving service and responsibility.

It shows the real historical influence of the real historical Jesus and the church that his apostles founded.

I cried out to God to help me understand his plan for me, because I felt wretched and confused, caught in double binds and mixed signals. The only answer I got back was love. Eventually I was drawn to learn about history.

It means do unto others as you would have them do unto you. But there are indeed instances when one puts somebody else's needs ahead of one's own wants, or even postpones one's own needs for the sake of somebody else's. And there is dignity in doing this if it is done from the heart and voluntarily.

But children, women and slaves were all lumped together as being under the authority of ancient Roman Paterfamilias in the Roman Household Codes. The apostle Paul had to come up with a Christianized version of the Roman Household Codes. Those codes was the legal foundation of Roman society. This legal foundation was formed in the crucible of a society that was not Christian. It had a history of male ancestor worship.

Yes, I can, and I pray for help to do so. I have to be strong, because I'm married to somebody with a lethal wit, and he has not hesitated to toy with my beliefs and tease me that he is my master and I have to do what he says and not talk back to him. He goes right for the jugular -- the same jugular that you equivocate about. It was necessary for me to get a very good understanding of what God expects of me, with no equivocation and no ambivalence.

I would never want to anger God, because I would not want my child's blessings withdrawn. I would die for my child, and I would eat shit for him. If God's will was for me to eat shit, I would do it, for the sake of my child. I cried out to God to help me to understand His plan for me. The only answer I got back was love.

I believe the most important thing is to demonstrate to my husband that I love him and don't only use him. He already knows I have to respect him because I depend on him financially. It proves nothing to him.

 

All I said that was a fact about my experience was that I helped my husband more before I had a child.

Example one: Before baby, he cut down a tree in the back yard with his chainsaw. I snipped up branches and put them on a burn pile. After baby, during baby's first year, he cut down a tree in the back yard with his chainsaw. He snipped up branches and put them on a burn pile.

Example two: Before baby, he would talk at length at the dinner table about his work experiences if he felt like talking about it. I gave him my undivided attention. After baby, he would start to talk at the dinner table about his work experiences. Baby would interrupt with crying.

I'm really not trying to get smart about this. These are just a few examples from my literal experience.

It's just a fact that I am not as helpful to him as I was before. It is realism. Do you think I just easily shrug it off just like that? There have been evenings at the dinner table when he has thrown his plate of food in the trash and gone into his lair to play WOW, saying, "I'll never try to talk to you about anything again," after being frustrated by multiple interruptions.

Do you think I don't want to be needed by him? Do you want to know who he felt was helping him a lot and who never vexxed him? A very young, thin, blonde and pretty employee who was one of the few employees he could delegate work to.

Do you want to know what he would find more helpful to him? If I had been able to go back to work after a year or two!

I sure helped him a lot. I had a child with something wrong with him. How's that for a helpmeet? I'm sorry, but I go through too much not to keep it real. I don't mean to be contentious, but I can't both live my life and pretend not to live it. I can't do both. The first thing is already too hard.

Please don't make assumptions and accusations about me. You have no idea about me or my life.

I could quibble about the meaning of "help meet for him" based upon the notes in my rather conservative Bible, the Key Word Study Bible. But I will not even go there. Because it truly does not matter in all reality in my experience, anyway!

 

My priority is on continuing basic Christian teachings. Being a priest is not just a career opportunity. I think if Catholics allowed women to be priests, they would have to open the door to other changes. The reason given by Pope John Paul II was that he did not have authority. He had to continue the teachings of the apostles passed along in the tradition of apostolic succession. If apostolic succession is done away with, then most likely the New Age and/or Marxism would come rushing in. Whatever you think of the Catholic Chuch, it has been a vessel for basic Christian teachings for 2000 years. It has more members than any other denomination in the world, by far.

It would ultimately be bad for women for Christianity to be completely replaced by New Age and/or Marxism. These are collectivist and do not teach respect for individual human dignity.

The Catholic church's respect for mothers is consistent with human dignity. If humans have worth, making new little humans has worth. It is all fully consistent.

Historically the Popes over-reached, but Catholic thinkers through the centuries developed the ideas that were eventually used to rebel against the authority of the Popes.

That said, I actually think the very early Christian church had women who opened their houses to be churches, and some people say some of these women were leaders or apostles in the early church.

Also I think people can just read the Bible, pray and spiritually share with family and friends. The church is spiritual. It is the collection of believers. People don't need to be a certain denomination to be saved. They just have to accept salvation from Jesus, whether they are Catholic or Protestant or have a pastor, priest, minister who is male or female.

The Holy Spirit can work through women and it doesn't have to be when the women are behind a pulpit. Women have for sure been involved in my own conversion. One particular aunt often has a way of telling me the exact Christian words I need to hear, when I need to hear it, although she could not really possibly know what it means to me all the time.

The important part is for the Christian teachings to be preserved through the ages and to be spread.

I find the language funny, although I think I get the gist. I don't think I'm virtuous far above rubies, but hopefully I'm at least a ruby in the rough.

I'm talking about respect not just for myself as an individual but for motherhood as a vocation.

If my child is valuable to God because every person has a soul and was made in God's image, and if God cares about all souls equally, then being the mother of my child must also be valuable to God, too. This is really a no-brainer of logical inference.

No, it's not self esteem. It's deeper. It's getting dignity from God because of knowing that God forgives me for all my moments of wretchedness, knowing that God cares about all souls equally, knowing God created all people in his image, and knowing that no human can ever take these things away from me regardless of worldly money, status or respect. It's knowing that God cares more about inner beauty than outer beauty. It's knowing that God cares about the things I do that are not seen or valued or rewarded by the world.

 

Okay, I see.

It's just my opinion that the daily reading of Scripture had more of an impact than anything, but I agree, environment plays its role. We just can't use that as an excuse for misbehavior.

Probably need test subjects.

Psych Meds are a big business. I recently spoke with a doctor and he pointed out that most research goes into meds for younger people. Get them diagnosed early and you have a steady income.

In case you haven't noticed, I am highly against drugs of any kind. Kind of ironic since I was a drug addict and alcoholic from about 14 to 24.

I agree that improper discipline is bad, but, I am opposed to those who want to abolish spankings. Sometimes a kids needs a good spanking. Nothing else will do the trick. And those spankings can save him from far worse beatings when he is older, lol. People need to understand there are consequences for wrong behavior.

Just as a suggestion, a good martial arts program can instill confidence in kids and a proper understanding of the use of force (defensive measures only).

I am sure it had an impact on him, but, oftentimes such poor parenting leads to a rejection of that which the child rejects. Probably as equally true that some grow up to act like their parents and do the things they do, but, again, that is no excuse for their personal behavior. Again, I don't see the poor parenting as a reason to burn animals. That goes a little deeper into the psyche.

Absolutely. One of my primary goals on forums is to debate doctrines I feel are harmful to a sound understanding of Scripture.

False Prophets are a favorite focus of mine. There are more out there than most realize.

It's a Bible Basic, those in authority are held more accountable than those they have a charge over. The Prophets hammered the Kings, Christ hammered the religious rulers of His day. And its just my opinion that the norm for Theology today is way off base, and has lost sight of some very basic principles of Scripture. I don't think most people really understand the magnitude of Christ's Work, but engage essentially in religious effort.

Let me ask you this, do you think the Disciples of Christ, when they were ministering under the Lord...were Christians?

And I only have a few minutes this afternoon so I will probably have to come back to the other posts, but, i will get to what I can in the time I have.


God bless.

 

I don't doubt your observation that daily reading of Scripture was helpful.

Absolutely, children have to learn rules and boundaries and be held accountable when they deliberately and repeatedly flout those. But that's like the weeding stage. There is an earlier stage of preparing the ground so that the weeds don't get nourished as well as the fruits and vegetables. This is actually true in gardening. You can even do this with lawns. It's the same with children. You need to pull the weeds from the childrens' behavior. But in some environments there will be fewer weeds to pull.

PANDAS has been studied with test subjects already by Susan Swedo a the NIH. It's just that it takes thirty years for new medical findings to be translated into clinical practice. Most doctors don't keep up with medical research.

It's very sad. There have been cases of three year olds being diagnosed with things like bi-polar disorder. Nobody has studied the long-term impact of psych meds on children this young.

In the case of ADHD meds like Ritalin and other drugs in its class, in a rate model, these reduced motivation and drive by having a bad effect on the nucleus accumbens. It's a very small part of the brain but is important. It has not been studied in humans, just rodents. It's very possible that long-term use of drugs like Ritalin set up children (disproportionately boys) to have no motivation and drive when they grow up, due to irreversible damage to the nucleus accumbens. We don't know, because rodent study findings are not always replicated in human studies. Doesn't it seem like we should know whether that is the case or not? Of course we should. Otherwise we risk a massive tragedy just for the sake of convenience and profit.

I am highly skeptical of drugs myself. I think they should only be a last resort but definitely not always the first resort.

Congratulations on overcoming your addiction and alcoholism. That is never easy for anybody. No doubt your faith has been an important part of that.

I agree.

I just don't think babies should ever be spanked, because it's not developmentally appropriate. It's more appropriate to arrange their environment so that they can have some freedom without hurting themselves or damaging anything. Or to redirect them. They are easy to manipulate and distract when they are little, anyway. Later they wise up to it. LOL.

Okay, well that makes sense. I have observed that Christ never seemed angry at sinners and never became violent with anybody, except for the hypocrites in the temple.

Um, of course? I'm not sure I understand your question?

I am afraid I could probably go on forever, but at some point I have to stop. Replies lead to replies. I felt like I was neglecting your replies before, so now I am trying to quote you and reply to everything. I suspect there are enough things clarified now. There is no pressure to reply more, but reply if you have time and feel like it.

 

Both Aquila and Priscilla - "instruct" Apollos.
Deborah was both a prophet and a judge of Israel.
Philip's four daughters - were prophets.

"Each one has a revelation" is the statement Paul makes about the church members in Corinth

 

I will personally testify [as one who lived in such a world as these], that yes indeed, violent video games [even just video games in general, even like Mario, teaches evolution, freemasonry, etc], and first person shooters [like Halo, RE, etc], and MMORPG's [such as WoW, GW ,etc] and the link, etc make people more violent, and break down the social and moral barriers, as it trains the mind/heart in the ways of satan, rather than Christ Jesus. Many of those things are absolutely filled with Gnosticism [XS], Kabbalism [NGE], etc. For instance World of Warcraft, is filled with sorcery, witchcraft, idols, devils, false gods, self-vengenace and revenge, and false pictures of who God actually is, and teaches the Jesuit concept of 'leveling up' [see Spiritual Exercises of Loyola], all to build up a false "character", et., it teaches theft, murder, covetousness, adulteries, etc. The video game is an addiction, using ones own physical chemical makeup, to release these in the body. It is actually devouring up the body, destroying the mind, eating out any true spirituality, and will destroy relationships, as it slowly replaces them.









Little Light Studios [Inside TV, Media, Music, Games, Internet,

BattleField HollyWood Presentations [Youtube, Vimeo, etc.]

 

i would argue religions kill more people then video games do.

 

Absolutely, especially secular religions like communism and Nazism.

 

I think the human imagination, when it turns toward art and entertainment without God, turns unwittingly to a world heavily influenced by the occult. After I became converted, my eyes were opened to my own education in literature and to my own fiction that I was writing. In my fiction I had been drawn ever more to New Age ideas. I rationalized it after realizing it by thinking that I must be tapping into Jungian archetypes even though they seemed to have walked into the back door of my imagination by themselves.

I abandoned the work in progress, and since that time, I have seen my ideas similar to my fictional ideas popping up in movies and Netflix series.

I realized that literary interpretation theories of our time are very occultish, although academia sanitizes every trace away. You can find the roots if you dig. For instance, Freud was influenced by the Lurianic Kabbalah. Derrida, the father of deconstruction, is always talking about trying to deconstruct things like the Law of the Father or the idea of an Origin. He does not say God, but of course we all know what he really means.

The gate really is narrow.

Of course fiction can be good, too, because it can help us empathize with other people. This is partially how children learn empathy as they develop, and it is why imagination and pretend play are important to their development. For children imagination is the royal road to empathy.

And our creativity is a part of having been made in God's image.

It's just that the non-Christian imagination, without necessarily realizing it, may tap into an occult imaginarium. And if/when that happens, it's easy to interpret it in psychological terms, as I used to do when I watched the Buffy and Angel series. I saw all the monsters and demons as being all about relationships and about the characters' psyches.

 

Thank you for those examples. I will need to look up those references.

 

One of the things I always kept in mind is the way I was taught when young. I was taught "Drugs are bad," but was never really educated as to why, so when friends of mine were discovered to be using them, it wasn't the guy in a trench-coat caricature I had been given as a child. I taught my nephew and nieces as to the subtlety of how our minds can change something we have been taught as bad into something we think was misrepresented.

As always, truth is always going to win the hearts of the child, so I feel being honest with them within the capacity they have at every age will keep them from rejecting truths taught them while young.

And I find that absolutely absurd. The problem with meds is that whatever the diagnosis is, after a few years of being on the medications you can be sure they will be what they were diagnosed. Its a form of drug assisted training in my view. Three years old is far too young to be drawing conclusions about bi-polar disease. And I am confident that a nurturing environment (which can usually be assumed if a child is being taken to a doctor, lol) filled with love and sound Biblical Principles can overcome such a diagnosis.

My little brother was put on that and it had a negative impact. That is why I did not want my nephew being put on it (that is what they were telling my brother needed to be done).

No drugs and one of the most laid-back people anyone will ever meet (he's around 25 nows, already served in the Navy, now in Air FOrce Reserves, and loves first person shooter games, lol).

And profit is the bottom line with most research. I am sure there are genuinely sincere researchers, but, life is life.

I didn't really overcome it, God just took the desire away. I tried for years, it was a tough and miserable life.

I would agree in the case of infants. As I said before, it is when they begin to exert their own will in defiance of what they are being taught that discipline needs to be employed.

One thing I learned raising my nephew and nieces is you have to let them bump their heads once in a while so they can learn not to bump their heads, lol.

When I first started watching my nephew I would take the cushions off the couch and safeguard everything. By the time the third niece came around I wasn't nearly so paranoid about that sort of thing. I think back to my own childhood and think, it really was a different world.

True, lol.

The religious rulers were...sinners, in the worst kind of way.

His anger is often seen.

I think you did, lol. Popular Theology teaches that men were born again prior to Christ (in the Old Testament) but the truth is, they were not, because no-one was being indwelt by God prior to Pentecost. Not even the Disciples. If you read John 14 you will see that Christ is prophesying of what is going to happen, and a central theme of John 14 is that He is returning to Heaven, sending the Comforter, and it is then that Christ begins baptizing people in the Holy Ghost, or, baptizing them into Himself in eternal union.

I will give you one passage to show that not only did the Disciples not believe Christ when He told them He would rise from the dead prior to His death, burial, and Resurrection, but they did not believe after He had arisen until He came to them and rebuked them for their unbelief:


Mark 16:9-14
King James Version (KJV)

9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.

10 And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept.

11 And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not.

12 After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country.

13 And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them.

14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.


Being a Christian is a result of the indwelling of God. God was in Christ reconciling the world unto HImself, and Reconciliation was not taking place until the means of reconciliation, the Atonement of sins...was in place.

Its okay...I do.

Regrettably, me too sometimes, lol.

I will look back at the other responses to see if there is anything doctrinal involved, though not today, have a pretty busy schedule today.

Going back to the roles of women, they are very much like that of men in the Body, in regards to our relationship with Christ and to our spouses. The primary point I would make would be that we are better able to abide by the Lord's will if we know it, and there is no better place to discover God's will than in His Word, that is what He gave it to us for.

I started a thread on the "Mystery of the Gospel of Jesus Christ," and so far have had no-one in Other Denominations" want to discuss it. Understanding the Mystery of Christ hekps us to better understand why we see Peter in Opposition to the Gospel of Christ, and then deny that he even knew Christ when He was taken. If you are interested, give it a look.


God bless.

 

Just take this as one woman's attempt to understand. Yesterday I prayed for God to send me the Holy Spirit to help me to understand His will regarding womens' roles. The thoughts I had soon afterwards were as follows. First I thought of the key concept of unity and noticed over and over again it is a repeated theme first, last, always and consistently. The imagery of Eve being fashioned from Adam's rib is imagery of unity. The language of cleaving to each other and being one flesh. Likewise the imagery of head and body.

Then I noticed that, in the New Testament, some of the scriptures that seem sometimes egalitarian, sometimes complementarian, sometimes authoritarian; are still always consistently talking about a theme of unity. Paul's famous statement that in Christ there is neither male nor female, Jew nor Gentile, slave nor master -- all are one in Christ -- is often taken as an egalitarian statement. And in a sense it is a form of moral egalitarianism. But it is also a statement about unity. Likewise it almost seems contradictory when a series of statements seems to circle back and nullify one statement at the end. For instance, in one place one of the apostles speaks of husbands and wives, Eve being created from Adam -- but then ends with saying from woman man is born. Once again there is no contradiction at all if you notice the theme of unity.

And then I thought of what authority and hierarchy, or what we would perceive as being those things, may mean to God in his design and plan. I thought that it is not about who is the boss, because God is always the boss. Any authority that is godly can only ever be delegated or derived from God. And no Christian can serve two masters. But then it occurred to me that getting caught up into too much concern with this kind of legalism is a distraction from the themes of unity and harmony.

Then I thought of the comparison of husband and wife with Christ and church. Once more it seemed to be about unity, because after all, the Fall separated mankind from God. But Christ brings the church back into unity and harmony with God.

Also I recalled a thought I had before of the church as being not just a woman but also a mother, with the members of the church being the children of the mother and each new convert being like another child.

And finally to end with just two examples, I thought of the taking of the husband's last name. For everybody in a family to have the same last name is a symbol of their unity. It is also easier to do geneology if there is a consistent convention. The convention could only go one way or the other. It would have to be wife taking the husband's last name or vice versa. If they would hyphenate names every time, the hypenated names would grow infinitely over time from one generation to another. If husband and wife were to make up a new name for them both when they marry, it would be weird and inelegant. For the sake of unity, somebody had to take the other one's last name, and there may as well be a convention about it to make it standardized across society and avoid confusion and chaos and inelegance.

This does not mean loss of woman's identity as it did in the time of ancient Roman paterfamilias. In that time and place, families were indeed as feminists caricature them to be. A woman was indeed like an appendage of her husband, lacking her own individual identity. One got identity from the family name, and there was only a family name if there was property in the family name and if the fire in the hearth was kept burning. When a woman married, she had to be carried across the threshold because she could not step foot in the house with her new identity until the rituals had been performed in the house. Then she took on her new identity as an appendage of her husband in her new family.

Yet that is not the case in a Christian marriage, because God cares for souls one individual at a time. There is no collective soul and no family soul. So in a Christian marriage, a wife does still have her own individual identity. The children do also. But there is unity in the whole family, symbolized by taking the husband's last name. Although there is unity between husband and wife, and together they complete the image of God -- because both male and female were made in the image of God, and neither one is completely the image of God -- both husband and wife still have their individual identity. Just as we will have our individual identities still in the afterlife, and not become sacred compost in Gaia or one with the noosphere in a cyberpunk fantasy or dissolve our ego into Nirvana. In Christianity there is both individuality and unity.

One more example occurred to me, that of dancing. In this image, it is more an image of dynamic functionality and elegance rather than of static rules. In some dancing the man always leads while the woman always follows. Yet when you watch a couple dancing or figure skating, they are still both equals, even if for the sake of unity one is leading and one is following. And it doesn't mean that the ballerina doesn't get to dance alone across the stage. Or for the example of a musical band, they each have to know when to stop playing their instrument and to let the other instruments have a turn. Even though there may be a front man for the band, as well as a producer, each band member still has their own individual creativity.

In other words I think that it is a matter of organization for functionality, and what we perceive as hierarchy does not exist for the purpose of upholding somebody's supremacy. The only One who has supremacy is God. What we perceive as hierarchy is for the purpose of serving order, elegance, unity and harmony.

It also occurred to me that it would be idolatry to worship a husband instead of God, and that if there is a valid headship doctrine, it cannot possibly cause a woman to "serve two masters" -- both her husband and God. That would make no sense. Individuals need to always see God as the highest authority, and all other biblical authority is only ever derivative or delegated. This brought my thoughts to the subjects of civil disobedience and martyrdom and conscientious objection ... and also the subject of people leaving cults and being deprogrammed ... but those would be entirely new tangents.

These are just some of my musings for the day about this subject.