U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
Old 10-17-2013, 10:32 PM
Location: Denver, CO
9,303 posts, read 5,503,380 times
Reputation: 4052


Originally Posted by garya123 View Post
So now, it is not just the Old Testament that was written by ignorant ancient savages but also the New Testament. We have one here [you] you claim, who can sift through and say what parts of the Bible are true and what is not so that we can finally know the truth. What hubris to contend for mere philosophy over God's word! Well for my soul sake God verified what He wrote in my heart by backing it up with the sure words of the Prophets and the Apostles and witnesses their words by the Spirit. Their is no greater witness.

Christianity was founded by Christ, built up by the Apostles, sustained by the Spirit, and recorded in the written word as a faithful witness against those who would tamper with what He has to say. No matter how much you and others think the written word is errant, the Spirit can teach from any Bible, and in any language, all the fundamental truths that God intended it for from the days He had it written.

The only stumbling block to mainstream Christianity is yours and others refusal to acknowledge the truth in favor of vain philosophy. Not only refuse but teach others rebellion against what Christ said Himself and what He revealed to His Prophets to say and write, which has endured and will endure long after you and I are gone.
Sorry to disappoint you Gary, but in the 5700+ manuscripts that we have of the NT there is somewhere around 300,000-400,000 differences or errors between those manuscripts. Most are minor, but some are quite significant. Mark 16:9-20 is not found in the earliest written documents that we have. But Mark left early Christians hanging in suspense if you stop at Mark 16:8. It was an incomplete story. Scribal additions added those final verses. And some newer translations of the Bible leave those verses out entirely or footnote that they are not found in all documents.

Suffice it to say that there are more errors or differences between the manuscripts that we have than there are words in the New Testament.

And pagans even accused Christians of altering the texts of the early gospels:

The New Testament was not completely unfamiliar to or ignored by pagan critics of the movement. Among such critics, Celsus and Porphyry demonstrated a particularly keen acquaintance with Christian sacred writings, and it appears that in some clear cases scribes may well have modified their exemplars in direct reaction to their informed assaults Celsus, in fact, was aware that such amendments were being effected. In True Logos he declared:

"Although you lied you were not able to conceal plausibly your fictitious tales. Some believers, as though from a drinking bout, go so far as to oppose themselves and alter the original text of the gospel three or four or several times over, and they change its character to enable them to deny difficulty in the face of criticism."

To some extent, it is fair to say, Celsus was in this assertion correct. Some copyists of New Testament Gospels did in fact, on occasion, alter their exemplars to avoid or reduce "difficulties in the face of criticism;" that is, some scribes occasionally modified the text of the Gospels under the influence of apologetic interests.

As a means of demonstrating this thesis, the following readings (Warden insert: you may read the entire article yourself to see his examples) serve as a sampler of textual modifications that, arguably, function apologetically, that is, that manifest a correlation between the apparent function of these scribal modifications and the recognized content of the early polemic discourse that ensued in the second and third centuries between pagan intellectuals and Christian apologists. Thus, I contend that some measure of apologetic influence on their producers constitutes, at least in part, the best explanation for the existence of these modifications in the textual tradition of the canonical Gospels.
Admittedly, the case to be made here is, in large measure, a cumulative one. The point neither stands nor falls on the merits of the analysis of any one particular reading, but rests on the
recognition of a pattern, a pattern in which a number of altered verses appear to have been modified under the influence of apologetic interests. The reader will find this compelling only to the extent one finds the whole greater than the sum of its parts.

It's even worse when one becomes aware that the Greek copy of the New Testament used by the KJV translators, is absolutely the very worst of the numerous complete Greek copies we have.

Contrary to what some in the KJO (King James only) camp believe, the 1611 KJV was not without errors. In fact, it took several subsequent editions to arrive at the version that is in use today. For instance, in the 1611 edition, Matthew 26:36 said, “Then cometh Judas”. Today, the KJV renders that verse as “Then cometh Jesus.” This is a rather significant difference. The first edition also contained the Apocryphal books, which were removed in subsequent editions. The 1613 edition inadvertently left the word “not” out of the seventh commandment, thereby encouraging people to commit adultery. This edition became known as the “Wicked Bible.” Another edition earned the nickname “Unrighteous Bible” because it stated that the unrighteous would inherit the kingdom of heaven. Furthermore, in using Erasmus’ TR (the Textus Receptus (1611) was the first printed Bible--in Greek) as the basis of the New Testament, many of Erasmus’ additions of margin notes into the text of the verses found their way into the verses in the KJV.
In fact, literally thousands of pieces of the Bible have been discovered dating earlier than the Byzantine texts that were the foundation of the Textus Receptus. These earlier texts formed the foundation for many of the modern translations in use today, including the NIV and the NASB. Thinking back to the game of Telephone, wouldn’t you consider someone who was twice or three times removed from the original messenger a more reliable source than someone who was ten or twelve times removed? If we can’t get to the original autographs, we would want to at least get to the earliest manuscripts available.

And as I stated on threads before, real faith begins after one recognizes the problems and errors in scripture and realizes God still speaks through them as He spoke through other flawed sources---Abraham who lied about his wife being his sister, Moses who committed murder and smashed the first set of the ten commandments, Sampson who fell to Delilah's charms, and David who committed murder to cover up his adultery. All those sources were flawed and yet God was and is still able to bring a message through them to people, just as He does with the flawed Bible--flawed by men who attempted to improve upon it, some who just may have made errors in copying, and others who were trying to put a spin on the scripture to battle whatever apostasy of the day had arisen.

Jesus had a terrific following of women precisely because He didn't see them as subservient. A woman once washed his feet in oil, not too long after that He displayed common ground with her by washing the feet of His disciples. She may have been a witness to Him about humility which He seized upon and incorporated into His message to all of us.

Jews, the earliest Christians, had different views about the place of women. And many of those early Jewish Christians couldn't completely dismiss the Jewish culture and practice. Paul saw no problem with women speaking in church in Chapter 11 of I Corinthians, even telling them how to do it. And then suddenly in Chapter 14 he dismisses his previous teaching and says they should keep quiet and ask their husbands at home. Either Paul had no idea what to think about women, or someone was messing with his message---and based on the number of errors we have, based on even early Christian leaders admitting that the Scriptures contained scribal changes--and not always through error---it is likely this is just one of those.

Blind adherence to a belief that has been disproven by overwhelming evidence is not faithfulness, it's just blind.

Last edited by Wardendresden; 10-17-2013 at 11:26 PM.. Reason: formatting corrections
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Old 10-17-2013, 10:49 PM
Location: Someplace Wonderful
5,178 posts, read 3,902,731 times
Reputation: 2555
Originally Posted by Sheila Renae View Post
God is neither male nor female and all were created in His image--Genesis 1:27 He refers to Himself as He meaning dominant and to His church as female meaning submissive. He says that if we are like minded with Him then He will make us dominant upon the Earth. In the Old Testament he had several prophetesses and named one as a judge of Israel (Deborah-Judges 4:4-5)
God says there is no respect of persons with Him, all will be judged the same, all are responsible under Him for their own actions. If He's going to judge women the same as men then---there is NO respect of person regardless of what man says.

Acts 18:26, Galatians 3:28, Romans 16:1-2, Philippians 4:3
Not even the angels marry--Matthew 22:30----this does not mean free sex for everyone it means that all are the same---will become the same creation and exist now as the same in His eyes. We all have the same capabilities to know right from wrong, man is not more intelligent than woman---same on the inside, viewed by Him as the same on the outside unless man is willing to take the responsibility for all the judgement on judgement day and let women be innocent.

Why would women be allowed to teach children and other women--THEY are the ones who rule the future. The greater responsibility and trust has already been given--to women. We teach the young men how to be wise older men.
Women may not have filled the role of "leader" of the earch churches established, but they certainly DID hold church offices.

for those who want to learn more, an excellent source is Women in the Ministry of Jesus: A Study of Jesus' Attitudes to Women and their Roles as Reflected in His Earthly Life by Ben Witherington (


Women in the Earliest Churches


What Have They Done with Jesus?: Beyond Strange Theories and Bad History--Why We Can Trust the Bible which has a couple of good chapters on the role of women in the New Testament.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 10-17-2013, 10:52 PM
2,532 posts, read 2,018,658 times
Reputation: 327
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
You have rejected the New Covenant in favor of the Old based on the word "written in ink." They words "written in ink" failed for a reason and the New Covenant exists for that reason. God has "written in our hearts" and prvided a Comforter (Holy Spirit) to guide us to the truth that is written there. The scriptures are USEFUL (profitable) but ONLY when read using the "mind of Christ" (WWJT) . . . NOT the "mind of YHWH" as described in the OT. If the OT had been inerrant there would have been no reason for the New and no need for a guide (Comforter). Our ignorant savage ancestors could NOT trust their hearts because God had not yet "written in them."

But with the advent of Christ the New Covenant is in effect and God has "written in our hearts" so we CAN trust what the Comforter (Holy Spirit) leads us to (if we are sincere and unselfish). It is believing the "precepts and doctrines of men" "written in ink" that creates the stumbling block to understanding and knowing God and accepting Christ's Gospel of love. Christ is the Way and a Way is a path to be followed . . . NOT merely believed in. Believing a path will get you where you wish to be is useless if you do not actually follow it. We do that by following Christ's instructions to His disciples to "love God and each other" daily and repent when we don't.

Hebrews 8:7-13 King James Version (KJV)

7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:
11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.
12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.
13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

Hebrews 9:15

For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.

Luke 22:20

This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you

After Christ all things are new and under the New Covenant to be found "written in our hearts" and guided by the Comforter (Holy Spirit), period.

John 14:26 King James Version (KJV)

26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
I have rejected nothing. What you fail to understand is the only reason the Old Covenant had fault was not because the law was in error but the people were in error being not born of the Spirit [they were carnal] which was not to begin until the day of Pentecost.
ROM 7:14 "For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin."
ROM 3:31 "Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law."

What is written in ink is no longer a stumbling block to those who have the Spirit but rather edifications, admonishments and verifications of truth to live by. It is written, "Grow in Grace and in the knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ." Not only must we grow in Spirit but in the mind of the Spirit.

The Scripture is the greatest source of knowledge [but not the only source] but which you belittle. By knowledge coupled with wisdom that comes from God [as Hebrews says], we have a more complete understanding of God's ways. Scripture are examples of wisdom not the guide in the ever changing nuances of daily life. The Spirit is but when a Scripture fits the circumstance, the Spirit often times reminds one of it. That, I understand full well. So please, enough of this Biblean stuff of yours. What do you know of my heart.

The Spirit is given [born again] because when we were first born it was of a fleshly nature but now through Christ we are born again so that the law does not run contrary to us because we are given a new heart to obey the laws of God and when we fail we have Him as an advocate.
ROM 8:4 "That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."

You said a lot of nothing because you use Scripture when convenient to make it suit your purpose but reject those things your incapable of understanding and call it savage and ignorant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 10-17-2013, 10:55 PM
Location: Southern Oregon
16,293 posts, read 7,669,209 times
Reputation: 1723
Originally Posted by Wardendresden View Post
And as I stated on threads before, real faith begins after one recognizes the problems and errors in scripture and realizes God still speaks through them as He spoke through other flawed sources

Just wanted you to say it again
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 10-18-2013, 12:20 AM
Location: Denver, CO
9,303 posts, read 5,503,380 times
Reputation: 4052
Default Even the OT was familiar with scribal manipulation

Originally Posted by nateswift View Post
Just wanted you to say it again
As evidenced in the Bible itself, scribal manipulation even impacted the OT.

In Jeremiah 8:4 (RSV) the verse begins, "You shall say to them, Thus says the Lord--" so we know the following verses all come directly from God to Jeremiah!!!

Jeremiah 8:8--

How can you say, "We are wise and the law of the Lord is with us"? But, behold, the false pen of the scribes has made it (the law) into a lie.
So it even occurred centuries prior to the NT and apparently God was aware of it!!!!

It should be no problem to see scribal intervention to subject women in the NT when no subjection was ever intended. Women were meant to compliment men and vice versa. They both served equal roles. Certainly Paul saw some differences and felt everyone should be content with the roles they served because, in his opinion, the Kingdom of God was going to arrive any day!!

Hanging on to scribal additions to NT scripture harkens back to God's statement in Jeremiah 8---"But, behold, the false pen of scribes has made (Paul's teaching about women in this case) into a lie."

Christian women arise and obey the voice of God when it calls you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 10-18-2013, 07:29 AM
Location: Coastal New Jersey
56,208 posts, read 54,662,203 times
Reputation: 66697
Originally Posted by ShepherdMaster View Post
I am discounting Paul more and more of late.

What is missed here is the explanation for why women were to not speak. Paul wrote letters to his contemporaries who were familiar with their current culture, of course. He may have been intelligent but not very smart.

Women of Paul's day were uneducated, could not read and often could not understand the context of what was being spoken by the rabbis. Women were constantly interrupting the reading or teaching. Paul instructed the women to sit quietly and he instructed the husbands to explain to their wives when they got home.
Of course. And the women probably asked questions that Paul couldn't answer, lol.

It's so obvious that this is all about the culture of that place and time. It baffles me why this is even still being discussed in this day and age and why this question has to pop up weekly on this forum. Of course women can teach and preach--OF COURSE--the gospel and its deliverance is not related to the shape of one's genitalia. Look at all the wonderful women preachers and priests and pastors and deacons working today--how awful if someone decreed that they were NOT allowed to serve!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 10-18-2013, 08:22 AM
19,950 posts, read 13,643,840 times
Reputation: 1973
Originally Posted by Wardendresden View Post
Here is another example of why true Christians must understand textual analysis and context in order to find God's message.

Paul never urged a social revolution, but he did say that "time is short" (until the coming of the Kingdom) and everyone should be content with their roles and not attempt to change their status--whether slave, free, married, single, male or female (I Cor 7:17-24). At best this can be seen as an ambivalent attitude toward women. They were equal in Christ and allowed to participate in the life of the community, but were not allowed to appear without veils (one of the few things our Muslim friends and enemies have gotten right).

In some of the early churches it was the equality in Christ that was emphasized; in others it was the need to remain subservient to men. So in some churches women played an important role, and, in others, their role was diminished and their voices quieted. After Paul's death disputes arose regarding the role women should play and eventually an effort arose to suppress that role altogether.

I Tim is a letter written in Paul's name. Many biblical scholars today believe it was a letter written by one of his later, second generation followers. Using Paul's name as that writer did was not an uncommon practice during the era.

The entire passage in I Tim. 2:11-15 seems a long way from Paul's view that "in Christ there is---not male and female." Either Paul, an educated man, is entirely flaky in his views of women (he was single after all!!), or most likely the scribal influences that preferred to keep women subservient won out over the long haul.

As I posted previously, it is easy to note the scribal influence in I Cor. 14. (and no one doubts that I Cor. was written by Paul). In fact, it is entirely possible and maybe even probable that verses 34-35 of I Cor 14 were introduced by a scribe who had read a copy of I Timothy. At any rate, the war against women was won in the early church by those who wished to suppress women as opposed to those who accorded them equality (subject to wearing a veil).

So it is very interesting that the only instruction regarding women written by Paul about which there is absolutely no doubt (wear a veil) is the one which is routinely ignored by at least all American believers of whom I am aware.
I'm sorry, but you really are reading a lot into those verses. The "not male, not female" statement was in regards to salvation--it had nothing to do with leading a church. I just don't know how to get around the fact that Paul compared it to the order of creation--and specifically said that women should not lead.

The OP asked if women pastors was Biblical. The answer is "No". They aren't. Women did not serve in the role of pastor or elder in the early church. Men are expected to step up and take the role of spiritual leader in their homes, and in the church.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 10-18-2013, 09:22 AM
Location: california
5,666 posts, read 4,889,400 times
Reputation: 6683
Paul and the disciple whom ignored Jesus direct order ar not biblical..Do not be called Rabbi=teacher (Jesus said so ) He provided the Holy Spirit to teach in His place . The gospel is merely an intorduction like an advertisment ,but it is not the whole package. The whole package is Jesus and the Holy Spirit,giving believers the capacity to obey God . Paul's distortion putting aside Jesus teaching, for his own, does not make it so. Paul teaches God compromising with sin (grace ,Jesus did not teach) and living according to pauls new rules. Jesus continued the same charicter of of the old testament relationship God always had, of accountability ,repentence , and obedience to God on a personal level . Not based on tradition, nor the things other men were instructed, but in a real time relationship. We are compelled to be obedient to God . If any person is obedient , you can't do better than that. Man or woman or child. But if some one is looking to men for approval, he has left God out of the loupe, choosing self govern(sin), not God govern, (righteousness).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 10-18-2013, 09:42 AM
Status: "Watching America made small." (set 5 hours ago)
Location: Ontario, Canada
25,881 posts, read 13,445,735 times
Reputation: 11699
Originally Posted by Vizio View Post
...snip.... Men are expected to step up and take the role of spiritual leader in their homes, and in the church.
This "reasoning" has led directly to the subjugation of women to the present day.

Only weak men cling to it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 10-18-2013, 09:46 AM
Location: Denver, CO
9,303 posts, read 5,503,380 times
Reputation: 4052
Default So your god changed his mind?

Originally Posted by Vizio View Post
I'm sorry, but you really are reading a lot into those verses. The "not male, not female" statement was in regards to salvation--it had nothing to do with leading a church. I just don't know how to get around the fact that Paul compared it to the order of creation--and specifically said that women should not lead.

The OP asked if women pastors was Biblical. The answer is "No". They aren't. Women did not serve in the role of pastor or elder in the early church. Men are expected to step up and take the role of spiritual leader in their homes, and in the church.
Let's see if I get this straight. The prophets in the OT were moved by the Holy Spirit?

The Holy Spirit breathing into the mind of the prophet so illumined his spirit and pervaded his thoughts, that while nothing as a person was taken away, yet everything that was necessary to enable him to declare divine truth in all its fullness was bestowed on him. Their inspiration consisted in the fullness of the influence of the Holy Spirit enabling them to accomplish their work.
Introduction to Prophets in Old Testament

Deborah was a prophetess--

Deborah is a unique character in the Bible. She is the only woman to be a Judge of Israel. Her story takes place between the years 1209 and 1169 B.C. She was a prophetess and Judge of Israel, the equivalent of king. How she came to be chosen for this position is not recorded but it is evident in her story that her leadership was honored. As Judge, she was also leader of the army of Israel.
Barak says he'll obey this command (to go to war) only if Deborah accompanies him. She agrees. Remarkable. This general is given a prophecy that his army will win but won't go to battle without Deborah. We can discern two things from this: that Barak had incredible faith in Deborah, if not in God, and that Deborah was a courageous and faithful woman.
Deborah doesn't take any credit for her actions or for the victory their army was to enjoy. In Judges 4:8, she tells Barak that the honor will not be for him but for God. Her humility is a lesson to us. Too often, we are quick to grab the glory of our successes instead of thanking God for them. Jesus taught, "Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 18:4 KJV)
The Old Testament: Deborah The Judge


Their message (the prophets) was related to history
. It grew out of some historic situation in which they lived. The prophets were messengers of their times. The message can only be understood by seeing it in its original setting. You have to become a student of history to understand Old Testament prophecy.
same source as above

She was the equivalent of a king, she was a judge, and so filled with the Holy Spirit breathing into her mind that she was enable to declare divine truth in all its fullness bestowed upon her. And she could at least accompany her general in leading an army into war.

So if God gives a woman a message, she should keep quiet and discuss it with her husband. What a devil that Deborah was--presuming to become not only like a king and a judge, but to, in effect pastor to deliver a message to the entire nation. But she shouldn't have because only pastors deliver messages and are spiritual leaders.

But by gum and by golly she WILL NOT pastor a church!!! By the time the NT came around God changed his mind about the women He created.

The fact of the matter is Paul was still a Jew, and Jews other than Jesus, generally treated women horribly, and the more orthodox of them still do today.

A man must say three blessings every day during morning prayers: He thanks God “that He didn’t make me a gentile, that He didn’t make me a woman, that He didn’t make me an ignoramus.

That shocking extract is part of a prayer ritual ordered in the Torah for all Jews to repeat, an article in the Israeli Haaretz newspaper has confirmed.
But it suffices to listen to the sermon the sage Rabbi Ovadia Yosef delivered five years ago, based on the well-known halakhic work “Kitzur Shulchan Aruch”: “A man must take care not to walk between two women or between two dogs or two pigs, and men should also not allow a woman or a dog or a pig to walk between them.”
‚€œThank God I am not a Gentile or an Ignoramus‚€Ě: A Jewish Prayer - My CMS | My CMS

So the views of early Christians, including Paul, while they have come a long way from that of the orthodox Jews, was still not developed to the point of seeing qualified women as anywhere near the same as qualified men. It's an ancient custom that came about because of muscles as opposed to brains.

Sorry, Vizio, but I think I would go straight to any church a woman like Deborah was preaching at and perhaps save yours for a time when there was a greater drought on spiritual wisdom. And based on what is written about her, and what you yourself have written, I think her words might echo much longer in my soul.

Once again a conclusion was reached by lifting a few verses from the scripture without tying them into the thread of truth that runs throughout the whole Bible. Isolated verses are the enemy of the Spirit of God.

Last edited by Wardendresden; 10-18-2013 at 09:56 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.

Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top