Inspired-Writing.com

“If I put in the gold my hope, And charm to the gold: My confidence are it is you who; If I was glad that my wealths were multiplying, And that my hand was finding very much; If I have looked at the sun when I was glistening, Or at the moon when it was going beautiful, And my heart deceived itself secretly, And my mouth kissed my hand; This also would be a judged nastiness; Because he would have denied to the sovereign God” Job 31: 24-28

    How many of us have not we wished to have the last car I shape, to live in a mansion, to be able to go out of walk and spend money without having to worry in the tomorrow? If we put the hand in our heart, many of us we would raise the hand accepting that this way we have lived. The love to the money has brought destruction in the life of many persons, and inclusive in the life of many "Christian" churches. This evil has drawn into the Christianity and now we see doctrines where the “material prosperity” teaches itself that according to the men who this way teach it, God wants to give to us. The desire for the wealths has caused divorces, familiar division, anyway a lot of evil. Entire families fight for there sees the one who remains with the best part of the legacy of some relative who has died. Truly it is slightly tragic.

“No serf can serve to two gentlemen; because or he will detest one and will love other, or will estimate to one and will despise other. You cannot serve to God and to the wealths.” Lucas 16: 13

When we read Exodus 20 we understand that God demands from us that we should adore only Him. He says to us clearly that we must not have other gods. But: how does the money turn into a god? The love to be rich, transforms us. In some cases we deliver our life to the work to do money; in other cases we committed an offense to gain easy money; we carry on dirty business to be rich; and we lose of sight God. In other words, this love to the money, makes us forget that God is the proprietor of our lives and that the only end by which we were created was to praise him and to adore him. If we are employed at excess, it gains us the weariness and we have no time to be in contact with God every day; if we committed an offense it is because we do not have God like being supreme in our life and for it we devote ourselves to do the bad thing. The important thing is that we understand that if we break the first order of God, of insurance we will sin.

1. The word “apostle“ (in Greek apóstolos) means: one that is sent; normally it is interpreted like “one envoy to expire with a special function in the church”.

2. The first mention of the title appears at the beginning of Jesus's department: Lucas 6:12-13: In those days he went to the mount to pray, and happened the night praying to God. And when it was day, it called his disciples, and chose twelve of them, which also it called apostles (be seen Mateo 10:1-4 and Frames 3:13-19). It is a question of a new and distinctive call on the part of Jesus Christ. He was not a called general opened for anyone, but extremely specific and particular. Including Pablo, who refers to himself as “the last one and the smallest of the apostles” (1 Corinthian 15:7-9)

3. Convinced that the number of twelve apostles was important, after the death and ascension of Jesus, the eleven that were staying met in Jerusalem (Facts 1:12-26) to choose the successor of Judas Iscariote. They chose Matías. In the process, they specified carefully the requisites to be an apostle:

• It had to coexist with the twelve from Jesus's baptism.

• He had to be a witness of the death and Jesus's ascension.

• He had to be a witness of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

In 2 Corinthian ones 12:12 another requisite of a real apostle is mentioned: the signs autenticadoras – “Between you produced the signs of a real apostle, with all perseverance, by means of signs, prodigies and miracles.” These signs were done by the apostles to confirm the truth of the gospel and to give testimony of Christ's resurrection of which they were witnesses and were preaching like something essential; and also there were proper and particular signs of the real apostles (Facts 2:43; 14:3; Hebrews 2:3 and 4) that put the foundation of the church once and for all.

4. It is interesting to observe that when Jesus Christ calls Saulo of Tarsus (since this one had not enjoyed the same experiences as the first twelve), it did it by means of a special appearance; also, it gave him three years of special revelation in the desert of Arabia (Gálatas 1:11-19), and a particular commission so that he was an apostle to the gentiles (Gálatas 1:1; Facts 22:17-21; 26:16-18; 1 Corinthian 9:1; 15:8).

The God's Word teaches neither the apostolic succession, nor the existence of contemporary prophets as it is taught by the Roman Catholic Church and International Coalition of Apostles (ICA).

In this article we will analyze the arguments generally used in favor of the women's arrangement.

Question #12 Pablo was writing his letters to attend to local and specific problems. How can we apply today what Pablo wrote if the situations and contexts are different?

Answer: Almost all the books of the New Testament were written in answer to some specific situation in one or more of the Christian communities of the 1st century. But those who defend the feminine arrangement would not say because of it that anything of the New Testament is applied to the Christian today churches. The letter to the Gálatas, for example, in which Pablo defends the doctrine of the justification for the alone faith, it was written to fight the legalismo of the judaizantes that were trying to turn the kind Galacia churches away in the middle of the 1st century. Would we dare to say that Pablo's education on the justification as the faith has no relevancy today for having being taught in reaction to a heresy that was afflicting the churches in the 1st century? The point is that there exist beginning and permanent truths that they were transmitted to attend to the local, cultural and passing questions. The historical circumstances happen, more the theological beginning remains. The inadequate conduct of the women in the churches of Corinth and Éfeso, to whom Pablo wrote indicating that they will remain kept silent in the Church, was a definite historical moment, but the beginning applied by Pablo to solve the problems caused by these attitudes remains valid. Or, the education that the women must be submissive to the masculine leadership in the churches and in the families, without occupying leadership positions and I govern, it is the permanent and valid beginning for all the epochs and cultures.

He asks #13: Where does one find in the Bible that only the men can be shepherds, presbíteros and deacons

Answer: The most explicit texts are Done 6:1-7; 1 Timoteo 2:11-15; 1 Corinthian 14:34-36 and 1 Corinthian 11:2-16. Some of these passages were analyzed by more depth in the previous chapters. Also, the intrinsic relation between the family and the Church shows that that one that is a head in the family (Efesios 5:21-33) also must exercise the leadership in the Church.

In this article we will analyze the arguments generally used in favor of the women's arrangement.

He asks #7: What must be done when the women possess pastoral vision, leadership, skill for the education or administrative capacity, or gifts for the evangelism?

Answer: The women must exercise these skills and gifts inside the existing possibilities in the churches. They do not have to be arranged to develop his departments and to show his gifts.

He asks #8: Is not it the resistance to the arrangement of the woman another reaffirmation of the ancient concept of the inferiority of the woman, done by theologians and important leaders in the Church?

Answer: The Church must walk on the education of the Sacred Writing. If theologians and ancient leaders defended mistaken ideas on the inferiority of the woman, he has the Church to correct them in view of the Writing, which show that God created the man and to woman be equal. So, to correct the errors of the ancient ones in the present does not mean to order women, since thus we would be committing another error. Certainly the women are not and they were never lower than the men. But there is a big abyss between recognizing the equality of both, and abolishing the different roles that God determined in the creation for each one.

He asks #9: Does any text exist in the Bible that says clearly: "It is prohibited that the women are arranged to the department?»

Answer: None of the passages used against the feminine arrangement say explicitly that the women cannot be arranged to the department. But all of them impose restrictions to the feminine department, and demand that the Christian women should be submissive to the masculine Christian leadership. These restrictions have to do principally with the education of the women in the church. Since the government of the churches and the official public education in the same ones there are functions of the presbíteros and shepherds (to see 1 Tim. 3:2,4-5; 5:7; 11 Tito 1:9), it is inferred that such functions are not part of the called Christian of the women. But moreover, if the silence argument wants to be used, this one turns against the feminine arrangement also, so there is no any text that he says that the women must be arranged to the department of the Word and the ecclesiastic government. The Writing attributes to the Christian man the exercise of the ecclesiastic authority and of the family.

He asks #10 If the women receive the same spiritual gifts as the men: is not it a test deque God wishes that they should be arranged to the department?

Answer: No. The conditions to exercise the official positions in the apostolic Church are prescribed in 1 Timoteo and Tito 1. We must notice that the education gift is the only one of the requisites. There are others, as for example, to be able to govern to their own house and be a husband of only one woman, that they cannot be fulfilled by Christian women - by any more gifts that they have.

He asks #11: Is Pablo's education applied today on the women in the Church? Was not Pablo under the influence of the culture of that epoch, which was very different from ours?

Answer: It is necessary to do a distinction between the theological beginning cultural supra and the cultural expression of this beginning. There are things in Pablo's education that are clearly cultural, like the instructions for the use of the veil Corinthian in 1 11. Nevertheless, while the use of the veil is clearly a cultural custom, at the same time express a beginning that is not determined by any culture in particular, and this beginning is the functional difference between the man and the woman. What Pablo is defending in that passage is the validity of this difference in the public cult - the veil is simply the form by means of which this would happen normally in the Greek cities of the 1st century. It is necessary to notice that Pablo defends the participation differed from the woman in the cult using permanent arguments, which come out the culture, time and society, like the distribution or the functions of the persons of the Trinidad

(1 Cor. 11:3), and the way for which God created the man (1 Cor. 11:8,9).

In this article we will analyze the arguments generally used in favor of the women's arrangement for the exercise of activities in the Church of Jesus Christ.

Question #4 There Is evidence in the Bible of which Hulda, Débora, Priscila Febe were leaders and were exercising authority. Is not this a Biblical test sufficient for the women's arrangement?

Answer: There are two points of being born in mind as for the department of these women. 1) The fact that the Bible describes how God used certain persons in specific epochs for special intentions does not do of this a norm. Let's remember the most important distinction between the descriptive thing and the normative thing in the Bible. God used the false prophet Balaam (Number 22:35) and up to a donkey to transmit his Word (N. 22:28; 2 Pedro 2:16). The disobedient Saúl also prophesied in several occasions (1 Sam. 10:10; 19:23), as the messengers sent to Samuel (1 Sam. 19:20,21). The description of these cases does not establish a norm to be continued by the churches in the arrangement of the officials. The fact that God transmitted his message across a woman an official does not do of her in the church. There are other requisites in the New Testament for the official positions in accordance with what we read in the explicit specifications of 1Timoteo 3 and Tito 1.

2) The prophets of Israel were not receiving an office by means of the hand imposition to exercise official ecclesiastic authority. The kings and priests, on the contrary, were 'arranged' for those functions, and they were exercising them with authority. There are no priestesses 'ordered' in Israel, at least in the epochs when the real cult was prevailing. Hulda was a prophetess in Israel, receiving consultations in his house (2 Kings 22:13-15). The same can be said about Débora, which was a judge in Israel in an epoch in which there was no king, and neither the priesthood was working - they all were doing what well seemed to its own eyes. The Débora department was a denunciation of the weak thing and the absence of value of the men of the epoch (Judges 4:4-9; compare with Isa. 3:12). On Priscila, his leadership seems clear, nevertheless, it is less clear that she was a shepherdess or presbítera. As for Febe, to see the question on her further on.

He asks #5: Cannot we affirm that the patriarchy, in accordance with what we find in the Bible, especially the Ancient Testament, is a harmful and perverse institution, which denigrates and humiliates the woman?

Answer: The patriarchy, since we find it in the Bible, and especially in the Ancient Testament, is not simply an affirmation of the masculinity, it is never synonymous of mastery of the male or a value system in which the man treats the woman contemptuously, devaluing it and super - valorándose to himself. The patriarchy is the system in which the parents take care of his families. The image of the father in the Ancient Testament is not firstly of that one that he exercises authority and to be able, but of adoptive love, of bonds agree on them of kindness and compassion. Only in the Hebrew Writing we can find a God Almighty and quite Kind Father. The patriarchs reflect the God's parenthood, although poorly. The God of the Hebrews is not like the irresponsible masculine gods of the pagan cultures about Israel, because He ever leaves his children that He generates, on the contrary, he takes care of them. The patriarchs follow the lead of God. In that culture it was taught to the Jewish man that it was not simply an animal, aggressive, assertive, and violently, but he was a father, whose aggressiveness must be transformed by the responsibility, and that it would be necessary to show the gentleness, and that the care of the children was the finished masculinity expression, and that it should join with the feminine being and the feminine world of the family, at the same time that it was supporting a necessary separation to exercise the authority. The machismo is a completely distorted version of some aspects of the patriarchy, and it oppresses the women. We must fight against the machismo, and not stop recognizing the truth on the patriarchy.

He asks #6: Was not Febe a deaconess, in accordance with Romans 16:1,2? Does not this prove that the women can exercise ecclesiastic authority in the Church?

Answer: We have to consider the following aspects. 1) is not clear that Febe was really a deaconess. Although the original Greek should use the term ‘deacon‘ to refer to her, we remember that this term in the New Testament not always means the deacon's office. It can be translated like serf, the minister, etc. Therefore, our translation: "I recommend them our sister Febe, who is serving the Cencrea church» is perfectly possible and is not a prejudged translation.